Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Autism

2011-01-30T05:45:34Z

ChrisGT90: Clarified thimerosal removal, added additional source

'''Autism''' is a type of pervasive developmental disorder. It is characterized by difficulties with social interaction; difficulties with verbal communication, especially pragmatic language; difficulty processing nonverbal communication such as facial expression; intense, narrow interests; difficulty adjusting to changes in routine; and repetitive behaviors. Other signs include lack of eye contact, delayed or unusual play skills, hypo- or hyper-sensitivity to sensory stimuli, and anxiety.<ref>http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/development-disorder?page=2</ref> It is usually detected by the time a child is four years old but in some cases, autism goes unnoticed into adulthood. There are many intelligent and talented autistic individuals.<ref>Temple Grandin, "Thinking in Pictures, Expanded Edition: My Life with Autism" amazon link http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0307275655/ref=wl_it_dp/103-3432247-4184629?ie=UTF8&coliid=I1CWNFSEUCIXQL&colid=49VN3HJC5OQK</ref> The term '''autism''' was first used in 1912.

Diagnoses of autism has increased from 1:10,000 in 1988 to as high as 1 in 150 people,<ref>http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/faq_prevalence.htm</ref> and it has been rising. Four times as many boys suffer from autism as girls.<ref name="Clinic Stats">http://www.iupui.edu/~psycdept/autism/autism.htm</ref> Among boys, 1 in 94 has the disorder. In New Jersey, which has the highest rate in the nation, 1 in every 60 boys has autism and 1 in every 94 children is affected. There is a seizure disorder in about one-third of those who have autism.<ref name="Clinic Stats"/>

Autism is said to exist on a "spectrum;" that is, there is a wide range of how this disorder affects people. Other pervasive developmental disorders on the "autism spectrum" include Asperger's Syndrome, Pervasive Developmental Disorder - Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS), Childhood Disintegrative Disorder, and Rett's Syndrome. There are many degrees of functioning in individuals with autism. Because of this, all individuals diagnosed with autism will not exhibit the same characteristics, or exhibit them to the same degree.

Autism was first identified clinically in 1943 by Dr. [[Leo Kanner]]. Dr. Hans Asperger also did some research into autism at about the same time and discovered Asperger's syndrome. As early as the 1990's, many intervention strategies, including Applied Behavioral Analysis ([[ABA therapy]]), were used to treat autism or mitigate its symptoms.

==How does autism develop?==

Although no one knows how autism develops, experts have focused on physical causes such as environmental toxins, the vaccine preservative [[thimerosal]], and the diet of both the mother (pre-birth and during breastfeeding) and child.
Some experts have speculated about [[genetic predisposition]].

Lisa Jo Rudy, mother of an autistic boy, wrote:
:Today, it is generally agreed that autism is caused by a combination of genetic and environmental factors -- and unrelated to "cold mothering." [http://autism.about.com/od/causesofautism/p/refrigerator.htm]

=== Physical Factors ===

The Autism Society says, "Researchers are investigating problems during pregnancy or delivery as well as environmental factors, such as viral infections, metabolic imbalances, and exposure to environmental chemicals." [http://www.autism-society.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_whatcauses]

* There are two popular theories linking autism and vaccines. One theory suggests the MMR (Mumps-Measles-Rubella) vaccine causes intestinal problems which lead to the development of autism. This theory was based on the research of Dr. Andrew Wakefield, who conducted a study using 12 children to make the connection between autism and the MMR vaccine. However, a recent investigation of this study has concluded that Dr. Wakefield manipulated patient data to support his conclusion, and used questionable research practices when obtaining blood samples from the children in the study. <ref>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article5683671.ece</ref> The second theory suggests that thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative used in some vaccines, could be a contributor of the development of autism. [http://www.autism-causes.com/autism-causes.html]

There are claims that environmental toxins increase the risk of autism, just as they increase the risk of cancer. [[New Jersey]] has the highest rate of cancer in the nation, presumably due to a heavy concentration of environmental toxins, and it also has the highest rate of [[autism]]. Autistic patients are observed to have higher levels of metals and other toxins.

A toxic [[mercury]] preservative used in [[vaccines]], thimerosal, is a suspected cause of injury in many recipients, including a cause of increase in autism rates.<ref>[http://209.85.141.104/search?q=cache:952MmAWeCOsJ:www.jpands.org/vol8no1/geier.pdf+jpands&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&client=firefox-a Thimerosal in Childhood Vaccines,
Neurodevelopment Disorders, and Heart Disease in the United States]</ref> Thimerosal is a inorganic form of mercury that was widely used as a preservative. Only after intense public pressure did the FDA and CDC act, in 1999 and 2000, to reduce thimerosal usage in vaccines. But thimerosal continues to be used far more than realized, as in the annual flu vaccine and stockpiles of vaccines left over from years ago. Since thimerosal was removed from childhood vaccines in 2001, U.S. rates of autism have increased rather than declined, suggesting that thimerosal was not a contributor to autism.<ref>http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/thimerosal/thimerosal_faqs.html#6</ref><ref>http://www.nationalautismassociation.org/autismincreases.php</ref>

The is enormous pressure to deny that vaccinations are causing autism, as such a revelation would result in political, legal, and financial consequences for those who have been supporting increases in vaccination. As researchers denied smoking caused lung cancer for decades, researchers now claim that vaccination is not causing autism.<ref>http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/13703.html,</ref><ref>http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B75KN-4DJ97VJ-8&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=c555dd340aa6cb7c3a18806ba0fd162a</ref><ref>http://www.iom.edu/?id=27771</ref> Many parents who see first-hand the changes in their children immediately shortly after vaccination see a clear cause-and-effect, and some are opting out of vaccination.<ref>http://www.acsh.org/publications/pubID.425/pub_detail.asp</ref>

Thimerosal is not the only ingredient of vaccines that may be causing the increase in autism. By assaulting the immune system at a very young age, multiple vaccinations may be doing other harm that is not yet fully understood. Autism is a neurological condition, and side effects of vaccination are known to cause other neurological problems.

"Rigorous scientific studies have not identified links between autism and either thimerosal-containing vaccine or the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine" <ref>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19614825?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_SingleItemSupl.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=1&log$=relatedreviews&logdbfrom=pubmed</ref>

=== Genetics ===

Some experts suspect that there is a genetic susceptibility to autism.{{fact}} The genetics of this condition are not fully understood; perhaps caused by complex interactions between multiple genes which would account for the "spectrum" like differences in the severity of many cases <ref> http://66.102.1.104/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=cache:7kMNqvTgRtoJ:www.ikhebeenvraag.be/mediastorage/FSDocument/52/Freitag-2.pdf+</ref><ref>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17764594</ref>

Simon Baron-Cohen, director of the Autism Research Centre at the [[University of Cambridge]] (U.K.) says that males and females are hardwired for different behavior, with boys tending to be stronger at mechanics, categorizing and systemizing information, mathematics, etc. and girls stronger at emotionalizing and empathizing. He has proposed that autism is merely an extreme version of the [[male brain type]], in which the (female) urge to empathize is nearly absent and the brain is almost entirely hardwired for the (male) tasks of systemizing.<ref>Baron-Cohen, Simon. ''The Essential Difference'', Basic Books 2003.</ref>

Leo Kanner in a 1949 paper identified "parental coldness" and a "lack of maternal warmth" in the parents of autistic children, leading to the term ''refrigerator mother''. The theory here is autism is caused by incomplete [[socialization]] during early childhood because of emotionally cold parents. The book ''Toxic Psychiatry'' by Peter Briggin notes that the frigid mother theory of autism was abandoned in recent years due to pressure groups.<ref>Briggin, Peter R. ''Toxic Psychiatry'', New York: St. Martin's Press, 1991.</ref>

Lenny Schafer, editor of the ''Schafer Autism Report'', rejects outright the current characterization of mild social retardation (such as "Asperger's syndrome") as forms of autism. He notes that autism is a disability, and if a person is not disabled from participation in society by their condition, in such areas as being able to hold a job or communicate, including communication over the Internet, they are not autistic and should not be diagnosed as such. He accordingly rejects that there can be such a thing as autistic self-advocacy, as anyone who is truly autistic would not have that ability.<ref>http://www.sarnet.org/</ref>

''Wired'' magazine has referred to autism as a "geek syndrome", or essentially as a form of identity-politics-for-computer-nerds.<ref>http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/9.12/aspergers_pr.html</ref>. Those favoring this interpretation of autism have coined new terminology, including "neurodiversity" for a population with and without autistic individuals , and using the term "neurotypical" for those without autism.

==Repetitive behavior==

They include walking on tiptoes, flapping of hands, staring at objects for a prolonged period of time, oral fixation, spinning in circles, and other repetitive activities.
These are called stims or stimming.

==Interventions and Treatments==

*Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA) - This is a behavioral intervention which applies the study of behavioral analysis, as well as the tools of this study, toward assisting behaviors of social significance in individuals of many different populations, including children with autism. <ref>http://www.centerforautism.com/getting_started/aba.asp</ref> Applied behavior analysis is used to increase positive behaviors, decrease interfering behaviors, maintain positive behaviors, teach new skills, and generalize new positive behaviors across many different settings, not just in a restrictive classroom or therapy setting. Therapists begin by observing the behaviors of the individual, focusing on skills and behaviors to reinforce or teach, and identifying interfering behaviors to be minimized. They then develop an intervention plan to reinforce the positive behaviors and skills, by using a system of rewards when the individual receiving the therapy exhibits the behavior that the therapist wants to observe. As the individual incorporates more positive behaviors, the therapist may decrease or change the reinforcement as necessary.

*Developmental, Individual difference and Relationship-based (DIR/Floortime) model - This is a relationship-based intervention, developed by Dr. Stanley Greenspan, which focuses on developing a connection with the individual with autism, emphasizing the role his or her interests, emotions, and preferences play in developing an effective treatment. <ref>http://www.icdl.com/dirFloortime/overview/index.shtml</ref> This model emphasizes individual differences in children with autism, and requires caregivers and therapists to approach each child accordingly. It begins with understanding the child's developmental stage, understanding the ways in which the child understands and learns information and processes sensory stimuli, and developing relationships between the child and his or her caregivers and therapists, who tailor their affect and interactions to the child's needs. This model especially emphasizes the importance of parents and caregivers in the process of their child's treatment, because of their unique relationship to the child.

*Treatment and Education of Autistic and related Communication-handicapped CHildren (TEACCH) - This approach was developed in the early 1970s by Eric Schopler and colleagues, and focuses on skil development, as well as fulfillment of human needs such as communication, social interaction, increasing feelings of safety and reducing anxiety, and engaging in productive and enjoyable activities.<ref>http://www.teacch.com/whatis.html</ref> The principles of the TEACCH method of intervention include: understanding the "culture" of autism (what characterizes individuals with autism, such as their thinking patterns and behaviors), developing an individualized approach to intervention for each individual, structuring the physical environment for effective learning, and using visual supports to assist in understanding and retaining routines, structures, and schedules, as well as to make individual tasks understandable.

==See Also==
*[[Evidence of Harm]]
*[[Asperger syndrome]]
*[[Symptoms of autism]]

==External Links==
#http://www.autismspeaks.org/
#http://www.autismdigest.com/
#http://www.nationalautismassociation.org/
#http://www.autism-society.org/site/PageServer
#http://www.autismlink.com/
#[http://www.opposingviews.com/questions/are-autism-and-vaccines-linked Opposing Views: Are Autism and Vaccines Linked?]
#[http://www.neurodiversity.com/main.html Neurodiversity - An Incredible Resource for Autism Related Information]

==References==
<references/>

[[category:psychology]]
[[category: medicine]]
[[category:autism]]

George Bernard Shaw

2010-09-02T22:36:02Z

ChrisGT90: Capitalization

[[Image:GeorgeBernardShaw.jpg|thumb|right|200px]]
'''George Bernard Shaw''' (known as Bernard Shaw) (1856-1950) was an Irish writer and playwright, born in [[Dublin]]. He was a lifelong [[socialist]] and a member of the [http://www.fabians.org.uk/ Fabian Society]. He was also a proponent of [[eugenics]].<ref>[http://medinfo.ufl.edu/other/histmed/stoyan/slide10.html University of Florida; Language of eugenics]</ref> Many of his plays had social themes, including ''Major Barbara'' and ''Pygmalion''; the latter was the inspiration for the musical ''My Fair Lady''. Also among his many plays were ''Arms and the Man'', ''The Devil's Disciple'' and ''Saint Joan''. In 1925 he was awarded the [[Nobel Prize]] for Literature.

==Religion==
As a child Shaw attended the Church of Ireland, an autonomous province of the [[Anglican]] Communion. Until he was thirty or so, Shaw called himself an [[atheist]]. He became one, he later quipped, before he could think.<ref>[[#refSloan04|Sloan 2004]]</ref> In the 1890's, Shaw repudiated atheism. In his 1931 play, "Too True to be Good," One of Shaw's characters delivers a speech sometimes taken to be Shaw's own view:
{{cquote|THE ELDER [''rising impulsively''] Determinism is gone, shattered, buried with a thousand dead religions, evaporated with the clouds of a million forgotten winters. The science I pinned my faith to is bankrupt: its tales were more foolish than all the miracles of the priests, its cruelties more horrible than all the atrocities of the Inquisition. Its spread of enlightenment has been a spread of cancer: its counsels that were to have established the millennium have led straight to European suicide. And I—I who believed in it as no religious fanatic has ever believed in his superstition! For its sake I helped to destroy the faith of millions of worshippers in the temples of a thousand creeds. And now look at me and behold the supreme tragedy of the atheist who has lost his faith—his faith in atheism, for which more martyrs have perished than for all the creeds put together.<ref>Bernard Shaw, "[http://books.google.com/books?id=HP6RHOPKeNYC Too True to be Good]," (Samuel French, Inc., 1935) ISBN 0573601518, p. 99</ref>}}
But in renouncing materialism, Shaw did not embrace theism, but rather espoused a mystical "Life Force," which he regarded as an impersonal force manifested in the sex drive and [[evolution]], leading toward the development of god in the form of a [[Friedrich Nietzsche|Nietzschean]] "Superman."<ref>George Bernard Shaw, Act III: "Don Juan in Hell," ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=ej0WAAAAYAAJ Man and Superman]'' (Brentano's, 1916), pp. 71-142</ref> In a 1907 lay sermon at Kensington Town Hall in London, Shaw exhorted:
{{cquote|When you are asked, "Where is God? Who is God?" stand up and say, "I am God and here is God, not as yet completed, but still advancing towards completion, just in so much as I am working for the purpose of the universe, working for the good of the whole of society and the whole world, instead of merely looking after my personal ends."<ref>George Bernard Shaw, "[http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_New_Theology The New Theology]," ''Christian Commonwealth,'' May 23 and 27, 1907</ref>}}
"In truth, Shaw didn’t believe in an existing God at all," concludes Gary Sloan. "What he believed was that evolution, eons hence, will produce a godlike race in which the life force will consummate its quest for godhead."<ref>[[#refSloan04|Sloan 2004]]</ref>

==Politics==
Shaw began his education by reading [[John Stuart Mill]], [http://assets.cambridge.org/97805216/62727/sample/9780521662727ws.pdf August Comte], [[Charles Darwin]] and [[Herbert Spencer]], and was converted to [[socialism]] by [[Henry George]]'s ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=JVIrAAAAYAAJ Progress and Poverty]''. Moving on to [[Karl Marx]]'s ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=afUtAAAAIAAJ Das Kapital]'', he began preaching socialism with the utmost zeal and enthusiasm<ref>[[#refHenderson1911| Henderson 1911]]: 102-104.</ref> at socialist rallies, or just standing on soapboxes at Speaker's Corner in [[London]]'s Hyde Park.<ref>[[#refMazer|Mazer]]</ref>

After reading a Fabian tract, ''Why are the many poor?'' in 1884, Shaw joined the [http://www.fabians.org.uk/ Fabian Society], which, he wrote, "set up the banner of Socialism militant." He began writing Fabian tracts, and personally converted [http://encyclopedia.farlex.com/Sidney+Webb Sidney Webb], recruiting him into the Fabian Society.<ref>[[#refHenderson1911| Henderson 1911]]: 102-106.</ref>

At the invitation of [[Stalin]], Shaw visited the [[Soviet Union]]<ref>[[#refMazer|Mazer]]</ref> in 1931, at age 75.<ref>"[http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-11416320.html Review: ''The Lure of Fantasy: Bernard Shaw, Volume III'', by Michael Holroyd]," ''The Economist'', October 26, 1991</ref> He became a loyal apologist for [[Stalinism]], reporting the [[Gulag]] to be a kind of luxury vacation spa, its large population due solely to "the difficulty of inducing [prisoners] to come out... As far as I could make out they could stay as long as they liked."<ref>[[#refHollander98|Hollander 1998]]: 146</ref> On the last day of his pilgrimage, he said, "Tomorrow I leave this land of hope and return to our Western countries of despair."<ref>[[#refHollander98|Hollander 1998]]: 38-39</ref>

In 1933, Shaw wrote a [http://www.garethjones.org/soviet_articles/bernard_shaw.htm Letter to the Editor] of the ''Manchester Guardian'', denouncing [http://www.ccel.org/m/muggeridge/ Malcolm Muggeridge]'s exposé of [[Stalin]]'s [[Holodomor|Terror Famine]] as a "lie" and a "slander"; the following year he published a 16,000-word ''apologia'' for Stalin's mass murders, in which he expressed sympathy for the "unfortunate Commissar" who "found himself obliged to put a pistol in his pocket and with his own hand shoot" disobedient workers, "so that he might the more impressively ask the rest of the staff whether they yet grasped the fact that orders are meant to be executed." Shaw went on to attack the [http://www.ourcivilisation.com/cooray/btof/chap180.htm rule of law], in favor of the arbitrary rule of men, adding:
{{cquote|[T]he most elaborate code of [law]... would still have left unspecified a hundred ways in which wreckers of Communism could have sidetracked it without ever having to face the essential questions: are you pulling your weight in the social boat? are you giving more trouble than you are worth? have you earned the privilege of living in a civilized community? That is why the Russians were forced to set up an Inquisition or Star Chamber, called at first the Cheka and now the Gay Pay Oo (Ogpu), to go into these questions and "liquidate" persons who could not answer them satisfactorily.<ref>[[#refShaw33|Shaw 1933]]</ref>}}

In 1936, Shaw publicly defended Stalin's [[Great Purge|Great Terror]], saying, “Even in the opinion of the bitterest enemies of the Soviet Union and of her government, the [purge] trials have clearly demonstrated the existence of active conspiracies against the regime... I am convinced that this is the truth, and I am convinced that it will carry the ring of truth even in Western Europe, even for hostile readers.”<ref>Arnold Beichman, "[http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/3058571.html Death of the Butcher]," ''Hoover Digest'', 2003 No. 2</ref> Shaw likewise defended Stalin's mass executions, scolding, "we cannot afford to give ourselves moral airs when our most enterprising neighbor... humanely and judiciously liquidates a handful of exploiters and speculators..."<ref>[[#refHollander98|Hollander 1998]]: 152-153</ref> In 1949, he even wrote a [http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/shaw/works/lysenko.htm defense] of Stalin's pseudo-scientific [[Lysenkoism]].

In addition to [[socialism]], Shaw was an advocate of [[eugenics]]. "Extermination must be put on a scientific basis if it is ever to be carried out humanely and apologetically as well as thoroughly," he wrote. "[I]f we desire a certain type of civilization and culture we must exterminate the sort of people who do not fit into it.<ref>[[#refShaw33|Shaw 1933]]</ref> In one public address, Shaw gave expression to the [[Nazi]] doctrine of "life unworthy of life" (''Lebensunwertes Leben''):<ref>Dr. Stuart D. Stein, [http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/mord.htm "Life Unworthy of Life" and other Medical Killing Programmes], University of the West of England</ref>
{{cquote|You must all know half a dozen people at least who are no use in this world, who are more trouble than they are worth. Just put them there and say Sir, or Madam, now will you be kind enough to justify your existence?
If you can’t justify your existence, if you’re not pulling your weight, and since you won't, if you’re not producing as much as you consume or perhaps a little more, then, clearly, we cannot use the organizations of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive, because your life does not benefit us and it can’t be of very much use to yourself.<ref>Edvins Snore, ''[http://www.sovietstory.com/ The Soviet Story]'' ([http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQvsf2MUKRQ Clip])</ref>}}
One of Shaw's long-term obsessions was mass murder by means of poison gas. In a 1910 lecture before the Eugenics Education Society, he said:
{{cquote|We should find ourselves committed to killing a great many people whom we now leave living... A part of eugenic politics would finally land us in an extensive use of the lethal chamber. A great many people would have to be put out of existence simply because it wastes other people's time to look after them.<ref>''The Daily Express'' (London), March 4, 1910, quoted in Dan Stone, ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=-USctl-PAmsC Breeding Superman: Nietzsche, Race and Eugenics in Edwardian and Interwar Britain]'' (Liverpool University Press, 2002) ISBN 0853239975</ref>}}
In the [[BBC]]'s weekly magazine, Shaw made a 1933 "appeal to the chemists to discover a humane gas that will kill instantly and painlessly. Deadly by all means, but humane not cruel..."<ref>''The Listener'' (London), February 7, 1934</ref> His appeal would shortly come to fruition in [[Nazi]] Germany. As Robert Jay Lifton notes in ''The Nazi Doctors'', "The use of poison gas—first carbon monoxide and then Zyklon B—was the technological achievement permitting 'humane killing.'"<ref>Robert Jay Lifton, ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=bv8IAqVh8EAC The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide]'' (Basic Books, 1986) ISBN 0465049052, p. 453</ref>

Shaw admired not just [[Stalin]], but [[Mussolini]] and even [[Hitler]].<ref>"[http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F70810FA3C5513738DDDA90994DA415B838FF1D3 Shaw Heaps Praise Upon the Dictators: While Parliaments Get Nowhere, He Says, Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin Do Things]," From an Address By George Bernard Shaw, ''The New York Times'', December 10, 1933</ref> He despised freedom, writing, "Mussolini... Hitler and the rest can all depend on me to judge them by their ability to deliver the goods and not by... comfortable notions of freedom."<ref>[[#refHollander98|Hollander 1998]]: 169</ref> Asked what [[Briton]]s should do if the [[Nazi]]s crossed the channel into [[Britain]], Shaw replied, "Welcome them as tourists."<ref>Thomas Sowell, "[http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell092401.asp Pacifism and war]," ''Jewish World Review'', September 24, 2001 (7 Tishrei, 5762)</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External Links==
* [http://www.online-literature.com/george_bernard_shaw/ George Bernard Shaw Biography and works] at [http://www.online-literature.com/ The Literature Network]
* [http://www.aim.org/wls/author/george-bernard-shaw/ What Liberals Say - George Bernard Shaw], [[Accuracy In Media]]
* <cite id=refSloan04>Gary Sloan, "[http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-127163470/religion-george-bernard-shaw.html The Religion of George Bernard Shaw: When Is an Atheist?]," ''[http://www.atheists.org/magazine/ American Atheist]'', Autumn 2004</cite>
* <cite id=refHenderson1911>Archibald Henderson, ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=twQBAAAAYAAJ George Bernard Shaw: His Life and Works]'' (Cincinnati: Stewart & Kidd, 1911) ISBN 1417961775</cite>
* <cite id=refMazer>Cary M. Mazer, [http://www.english.upenn.edu/~cmazer/mis1.html Bernard Shaw: a Brief Biography], University of Pennsylvania</cite>
* <cite id=refHollander98>Paul Hollander, ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=pGiOK2dgDpMC Political Pilgrims: Western Intellectuals in Search of the Good Society]'' (New Brunswick, N.J: Transaction Publishers, 1998) ISBN 1560009543</cite>
* <cite id=refShaw33>George Bernard Shaw, [http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks03/0300561h.html#p01 Preface], "On the Rocks" (1933)</cite>

{{DEFAULTSORT: Shaw, George Bernard}}

[[Category:Playwrights]]
[[Category:People who were Educated at Home]]
[[Category:Nobel laureates in Literature]]
[[Category: Eugenicists]]

Talk:Gulf of Mexico oil spill

2010-09-02T22:28:41Z

ChrisGT90: /* "Oil rigs today generally don't cause spills..." */

It is high time Obama care about the environment like the Republicans do and end unsafe offshore drilling once and for all. [[User:JohnLeDeux|JohnLeDeux]] 21:26, 10 May 2010 (EDT)

== Marc Antony said that Cesar was ambitious ==

This statement is factual correct. But it makes the knowledgeable laugh, and it misleads those who don't have any further knowledge of ''Julius Cesar''.

Reading such a statement in an encyclopedia where you expect truthful entries is confusing at best, deceitful at worst. If I read this sentence in a wiki, I would think that someone made a bad joke and revert it.

Why? Because, though Marc Antony uttered these words (at least in [[Shakespeare]]'s work), he was just quoting Brute. It wasn't his own opinion. How do we know this? By reading the rest of the great speech. So, he quoted words which stated the opposite of what he thought.

Now, I read: ''Nobel Laurette [sic] in Economics, Dr. Paul Krugman, who has been highly critical of Obama economic policy wrote in his regular New York Times opinion column, Conscience of a Liberal, "The oil spill is Obama's fault."''

The reader of this line is lead to believe that Paul Krugman thinks that the oil spill is Obama's fault. But is this the case? Obviously not, as Krugman goes on: ''No, I haven’t lost my mind — that’s not what I believe. But you know that’s what the talk-show hosts will be saying soon, if they haven’t already started. The only question is what the story will be.''

So, Krugman is ''quoting'' some - though only imagined - talk-show hosts. And omitting this in the article is au par with stating ''Marc Antony said that Cesar was ambitious'' - misleading at best, deceitful at worst, ridiculous to those who read Krugman's column.

[[User:FrankC|FrankC aka ComedyFan]] 10:35, 11 May 2010 (EDT)
:So Krugman was saying "I told you so" for not listening to him and distancing himself further from Obama apologists? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:11, 11 May 2010 (EDT)

::Paul Krugman states the the claim "The oil spill is Obama's fault" is not his opinion, so, he thinks that such a claim is wrong. It's beyond me how this can be accidently misinterpreted.
::[[User:FrankC|FrankC aka ComedyFan]] 07:52, 12 May 2010 (EDT)
:::So in Krugman's regular Opinion Column published on the Opinion page where Krugman says the oil spill is Obama's fault is not his opinion. ooookayyyyy..... [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 12:02, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
::::I think what FrankC is saying is trying to say is that, despite the title, the article is not Krugman accusing Obama.[[User:DrRaymondL|DrRaymondL]] 14:50, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
:::::Oh, you mean the ''New York Times'' is not a Reliable Source? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]]
::::::I see that RobSmith has readded the Krugman blurb despite being shown that Krugman does not believe that the Oil Spill is Obama's fault. Prior revisions were reworded to show the actual context of the article but RobSmith reverted that also. Can we get a final ruling from perhaps Mr. Schlafly on this because this is just plain deceitful. I don't even see why Krugman's opinion is even relevant considering the plethora of evidence in the article that shows Obama's poor response.[[User:Ameda|ameda]] 19:42, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
:::::::This has been an ongoing battle between Obama & Krugman before Obama was even elected. See [http://mydd.com/2007/12/7/obama-attacking-paul-krugmans-credibility Obama attacking Krugman's credibility] for example with a link to the source at barackobama.com, "[http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck/2007/12/07/fact_check_krugman_didnt_alway.php trashing the credibility of Paul Krugman]." There's stuff on the White House webserver as well. It's all typical liberal doublespeak; who knows what any of it means replete with the blame-rush-limbaugh claptrap. Facts are, Krugman wrote in the NYT it's Obama's fault. Even that measures up to WP's reliable source & verifiability standards. We know that, they're employing those same standards in its Conservapedia entry at this very moment. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 20:20, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
:::::::: No one is saying you're wrong about Krugman arguing with Obama, just that in that article he does not blame Obama for the spill. On the contrary, he believes the opposite. To make a metaphor, using the article in this way would be the equivalent of saying a patriot quoting a terrorist who said "America is evil" hates America also. [[User:RaymondP|RaymondP]] 20:29, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
:::::::::According to the website Environmental Economics, [http://www.env-econ.net/2010/05/krugman-was-correct.html Krugman was correct.] [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 20:46, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
::::::::::In that article I believe they are saying that Krugman's points which he said he disagreed with are correct. Please read Krugman's actual article: '''he is not saying it is Obama's fault, so bringing up his article in this is deceitful!'''[[User:RaymondP|RaymondP]] 21:14, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
:::::::::::The points have been made, I tried my hand at correcting it but RobSmith seems to want it and since he is an admin. I suggest we defer to him for now and either let it stand or get the opinions of other admins. This page is quickly going to be nothing but talk, back and forth, back and forth, repeating the same stuff with nothing new or productive. [[User:Ameda|ameda]] 21:25, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
::::::::::::Alright, I understand and agree, I just felt uncomfortable leaving something so misleading alone. And sorry about my most recent edit in the article, I guess I must have slipped and highlighted a lot more than I intended! But anyway, is there a way for the issue to be arbitrated, because I'm gonna follow you by leaving it alone for now. [[User:RaymondP|RaymondP]] 21:34, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
(unindent) Ok, let's summarize. In an article Krugman wrote entitled, ''The oil spill is Obama's fault'', Krugman did not really say the oil spill is Obama's fault, but Krugman lacks credibility per Robert Gibbs, barackobama.com, and whitehouse.gov. Is this an accurate synopsis? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 22:40, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
*It's not a question of ''credibility'' or ''reliable sources'', it's a question of ''reading comprehension''! Paul Krugman expects his readers to be able to spot some basic literary techniques, like irony or satire. As he is writing an '''opinion piece''' - and not an article in the news section - he can take even greater liberties in their use. If many readers failed to recognize his intention, it would be Krugman's fault, and he would have to change his stile. If just a single reader doesn't get it, well, perhaps the reader should chose a not so challenging newspaper to read...
*Still, Conservapedia's article creates the impression that Paul Krugman thinks that the oil spill was Obama's fault. That's false, and it should be corrected.
:[[User:FrankC|FrankC aka ComedyFan]] 08:56, 18 May 2010 (EDT)
::Let me start by saying, don't worry, I'm not going to delete the reference in the article, I've learned my lesson and I'm sure there is a civil way we can resolve this. FrankC, I'd like to give Rob the benefit of the doubt and assume he simply did not have enough time to fully read the article, especially since he's the admin here. It is true, however, that in it's first sentence the article makes Krugman's opinion clear, that he does not believe what the title says. Therefore, I really do feel that either the reference should be changed to include Krugman's view, or, more preferably, simply deleted (why, after all, should someone reading this article be sent to someone trying to claim Obama is innocent?) Thanks, and hopefully we can come to a resolution everyone agrees on.[[User:RaymondP|RaymondP]] 09:05, 18 May 2010 (EDT)

== Drilling ==

I'm a bit puzzled by one matter in this article, which I really feel needs improvement (I, personally, have reasons to be concerned with this situation, and quite frankly I'm pretty frustrated at the administration's response to it.) However, this article seems to take the stance that oil drilling is bad and that approving drilling was what Obama did wrong. Considering that drilling is what will help us get off of foreign oil and is considered good on most other Conservapedia articles, this article could certainly benefit from shifting Obama's error from approving drilling to failing to respond, since, as of now, the article simply seems hypocritical. [[User:RaymondP|RaymondP]] 00:35, 19 May 2010 (EDT)

:What Obama did was be the cynical, corrupt Chicago politician he is and quietly approve the operating of the platform, without ensuring that proper safety guidelines were implemented. It blew up in his face, so to speak. All kinds of drilling are never 100% safe, be it drilling for oil on land or sea, or natural gas. ''Risk is always a factor''. Given the vast amounts of oil and gas we all use, the number of wells drilled, and their exceptional safety record, no one can honestly claim they have presented too great of risk. If the article implies otherwise, I am certain that is something the authors will correct in short order, so readers are clear on what happened. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 00:51, 19 May 2010 (EDT)

I am completely in favor of drilling in order to take advantage of our own reserves, but this must be done correctly and according to the laws in place to avoid this kind of disaster. What I am NOT in favor of is a president taking thousands of dollars from British Petroleum and then taking the unique step of granting them a ''categorical exclusion'' from the impact assessments required by law. [[User:PatrickP|PatrickP]] 08:27, 19 May 2010 (EDT)

I agree with you Patrick. This whole article rubs me the wrong way. I believe liberals were wrong to blame Bush for Katrina. I am a strong supporter of small government, drill here, drill now, and oil independence. And if Obama agrees then so be it. Let the states work this out with BP. Going after Obama because we disagree with him on every other issue seems somewhat disingenuous. It's somewhat akin to the Bush derangement people who opposed Bush on every issue just because he was Bush. Certainly the MSM is not blaming Obama for the oil spill the same way they would have blamed Bush. That's the point the talk show people are making. BP may have been negligent, but maybe they weren't. I am an engineer and I have to do dangerous tasks every day. I know the risks and I know I get paid a lot of money because I take those risks. That's how we get things done in America. And if you mess up and hurt other people you get sued, that's what the courts are for. I think the article would be a lot more interesting without so much emphasis on the politics. Facts about the cause and the effects of the oil spill. Maybe even include the history of oil rig accidents. More general information about how oil drills, especially these new deep sea oil rigs, work. That's the big element missing here. Obama is right when he states that oil rigs are generally very safe-just not these new deep sea rigs. They have to deal with an environment of extreme colds and high pressure. There are a lot of unknowns. This article needs help.
:I don't know that this article takes a stand pro or con one way or the other vis-a-vie the question of drilling. it simply chronicles the actual facts and events--something other media neglect and/or distort. Wikipedia, for example, to my knowledge to this day a month after has nothing about the Gulf oil spill disaster, both an environmental & far larger economic disaster to an international region. It does have an extensive article about a lost rig laying at the bottom of the gulf, though. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 23:32, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

== Deepwater Workers killed in the blast ==

Given that the liberal media has basically ignored the eleven men killed in the blast (when was the last time you heard any of their names mentioned?) it might be nice if we could mention them in the article. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 22:38, 11 June 2010 (EDT)

== "Oil rigs today generally don't cause spills..." ==

Is there a reason why this quote is featured in large letters at the top of the article? It's a perfectly correct statement (so there's no reason to point it out as an error), but it's not a very enlightening one (so it's not interesting enough to be the most prominent point of the article). If it's pointing out the folly in Obama's handling of this, I'm sure there are better quotes that we can use. This one is a perfectly reasonable and accurate thing to say. I would suggest alternative quotes, but I don't know what goal we're trying to achieve with them. [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 00:31, 2 September 2010 (EDT)

:Since another rig just blew today, that makes Obama's statement 0-2. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 11:36, 2 September 2010 (EDT)

::Would you really like a list of every oil rig that hasn't blown up? The two rigs that exploded are the exception, not the rule. I would like to provide another quote, but I don't know what goal we're trying to accomplish with the quotes. If there's a point we want to make it, I'll find a different quote that makes that point better. Just let me know what to look for. [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 18:28, 2 September 2010 (EDT)

Talk:Gulf of Mexico oil spill

2010-09-02T04:32:26Z

ChrisGT90: /* "Oil rigs today generally don't cause spills..." */

Talk:Gulf of Mexico oil spill

2010-09-02T04:31:02Z

ChrisGT90: /* "Oil rigs today generally don't cause spills..." */ new section

It is high time Obama care about the environment like the Republicans do and end unsafe offshore drilling once and for all. [[User:JohnLeDeux|JohnLeDeux]] 21:26, 10 May 2010 (EDT)

== Marc Antony said that Cesar was ambitious ==

This statement is factual correct. But it makes the knowledgeable laugh, and it misleads those who don't have any further knowledge of ''Julius Cesar''.

Reading such a statement in an encyclopedia where you expect truthful entries is confusing at best, deceitful at worst. If I read this sentence in a wiki, I would think that someone made a bad joke and revert it.

Why? Because, though Marc Antony uttered these words (at least in [[Shakespeare]]'s work), he was just quoting Brute. It wasn't his own opinion. How do we know this? By reading the rest of the great speech. So, he quoted words which stated the opposite of what he thought.

Now, I read: ''Nobel Laurette [sic] in Economics, Dr. Paul Krugman, who has been highly critical of Obama economic policy wrote in his regular New York Times opinion column, Conscience of a Liberal, "The oil spill is Obama's fault."''

The reader of this line is lead to believe that Paul Krugman thinks that the oil spill is Obama's fault. But is this the case? Obviously not, as Krugman goes on: ''No, I haven’t lost my mind — that’s not what I believe. But you know that’s what the talk-show hosts will be saying soon, if they haven’t already started. The only question is what the story will be.''

So, Krugman is ''quoting'' some - though only imagined - talk-show hosts. And omitting this in the article is au par with stating ''Marc Antony said that Cesar was ambitious'' - misleading at best, deceitful at worst, ridiculous to those who read Krugman's column.

[[User:FrankC|FrankC aka ComedyFan]] 10:35, 11 May 2010 (EDT)
:So Krugman was saying "I told you so" for not listening to him and distancing himself further from Obama apologists? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:11, 11 May 2010 (EDT)

::Paul Krugman states the the claim "The oil spill is Obama's fault" is not his opinion, so, he thinks that such a claim is wrong. It's beyond me how this can be accidently misinterpreted.
::[[User:FrankC|FrankC aka ComedyFan]] 07:52, 12 May 2010 (EDT)
:::So in Krugman's regular Opinion Column published on the Opinion page where Krugman says the oil spill is Obama's fault is not his opinion. ooookayyyyy..... [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 12:02, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
::::I think what FrankC is saying is trying to say is that, despite the title, the article is not Krugman accusing Obama.[[User:DrRaymondL|DrRaymondL]] 14:50, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
:::::Oh, you mean the ''New York Times'' is not a Reliable Source? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]]
::::::I see that RobSmith has readded the Krugman blurb despite being shown that Krugman does not believe that the Oil Spill is Obama's fault. Prior revisions were reworded to show the actual context of the article but RobSmith reverted that also. Can we get a final ruling from perhaps Mr. Schlafly on this because this is just plain deceitful. I don't even see why Krugman's opinion is even relevant considering the plethora of evidence in the article that shows Obama's poor response.[[User:Ameda|ameda]] 19:42, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
:::::::This has been an ongoing battle between Obama & Krugman before Obama was even elected. See [http://mydd.com/2007/12/7/obama-attacking-paul-krugmans-credibility Obama attacking Krugman's credibility] for example with a link to the source at barackobama.com, "[http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck/2007/12/07/fact_check_krugman_didnt_alway.php trashing the credibility of Paul Krugman]." There's stuff on the White House webserver as well. It's all typical liberal doublespeak; who knows what any of it means replete with the blame-rush-limbaugh claptrap. Facts are, Krugman wrote in the NYT it's Obama's fault. Even that measures up to WP's reliable source & verifiability standards. We know that, they're employing those same standards in its Conservapedia entry at this very moment. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 20:20, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
:::::::: No one is saying you're wrong about Krugman arguing with Obama, just that in that article he does not blame Obama for the spill. On the contrary, he believes the opposite. To make a metaphor, using the article in this way would be the equivalent of saying a patriot quoting a terrorist who said "America is evil" hates America also. [[User:RaymondP|RaymondP]] 20:29, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
:::::::::According to the website Environmental Economics, [http://www.env-econ.net/2010/05/krugman-was-correct.html Krugman was correct.] [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 20:46, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
::::::::::In that article I believe they are saying that Krugman's points which he said he disagreed with are correct. Please read Krugman's actual article: '''he is not saying it is Obama's fault, so bringing up his article in this is deceitful!'''[[User:RaymondP|RaymondP]] 21:14, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
:::::::::::The points have been made, I tried my hand at correcting it but RobSmith seems to want it and since he is an admin. I suggest we defer to him for now and either let it stand or get the opinions of other admins. This page is quickly going to be nothing but talk, back and forth, back and forth, repeating the same stuff with nothing new or productive. [[User:Ameda|ameda]] 21:25, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
::::::::::::Alright, I understand and agree, I just felt uncomfortable leaving something so misleading alone. And sorry about my most recent edit in the article, I guess I must have slipped and highlighted a lot more than I intended! But anyway, is there a way for the issue to be arbitrated, because I'm gonna follow you by leaving it alone for now. [[User:RaymondP|RaymondP]] 21:34, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
(unindent) Ok, let's summarize. In an article Krugman wrote entitled, ''The oil spill is Obama's fault'', Krugman did not really say the oil spill is Obama's fault, but Krugman lacks credibility per Robert Gibbs, barackobama.com, and whitehouse.gov. Is this an accurate synopsis? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 22:40, 15 May 2010 (EDT)
*It's not a question of ''credibility'' or ''reliable sources'', it's a question of ''reading comprehension''! Paul Krugman expects his readers to be able to spot some basic literary techniques, like irony or satire. As he is writing an '''opinion piece''' - and not an article in the news section - he can take even greater liberties in their use. If many readers failed to recognize his intention, it would be Krugman's fault, and he would have to change his stile. If just a single reader doesn't get it, well, perhaps the reader should chose a not so challenging newspaper to read...
*Still, Conservapedia's article creates the impression that Paul Krugman thinks that the oil spill was Obama's fault. That's false, and it should be corrected.
:[[User:FrankC|FrankC aka ComedyFan]] 08:56, 18 May 2010 (EDT)
::Let me start by saying, don't worry, I'm not going to delete the reference in the article, I've learned my lesson and I'm sure there is a civil way we can resolve this. FrankC, I'd like to give Rob the benefit of the doubt and assume he simply did not have enough time to fully read the article, especially since he's the admin here. It is true, however, that in it's first sentence the article makes Krugman's opinion clear, that he does not believe what the title says. Therefore, I really do feel that either the reference should be changed to include Krugman's view, or, more preferably, simply deleted (why, after all, should someone reading this article be sent to someone trying to claim Obama is innocent?) Thanks, and hopefully we can come to a resolution everyone agrees on.[[User:RaymondP|RaymondP]] 09:05, 18 May 2010 (EDT)

== Drilling ==

I'm a bit puzzled by one matter in this article, which I really feel needs improvement (I, personally, have reasons to be concerned with this situation, and quite frankly I'm pretty frustrated at the administration's response to it.) However, this article seems to take the stance that oil drilling is bad and that approving drilling was what Obama did wrong. Considering that drilling is what will help us get off of foreign oil and is considered good on most other Conservapedia articles, this article could certainly benefit from shifting Obama's error from approving drilling to failing to respond, since, as of now, the article simply seems hypocritical. [[User:RaymondP|RaymondP]] 00:35, 19 May 2010 (EDT)

:What Obama did was be the cynical, corrupt Chicago politician he is and quietly approve the operating of the platform, without ensuring that proper safety guidelines were implemented. It blew up in his face, so to speak. All kinds of drilling are never 100% safe, be it drilling for oil on land or sea, or natural gas. ''Risk is always a factor''. Given the vast amounts of oil and gas we all use, the number of wells drilled, and their exceptional safety record, no one can honestly claim they have presented too great of risk. If the article implies otherwise, I am certain that is something the authors will correct in short order, so readers are clear on what happened. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 00:51, 19 May 2010 (EDT)

I am completely in favor of drilling in order to take advantage of our own reserves, but this must be done correctly and according to the laws in place to avoid this kind of disaster. What I am NOT in favor of is a president taking thousands of dollars from British Petroleum and then taking the unique step of granting them a ''categorical exclusion'' from the impact assessments required by law. [[User:PatrickP|PatrickP]] 08:27, 19 May 2010 (EDT)

I agree with you Patrick. This whole article rubs me the wrong way. I believe liberals were wrong to blame Bush for Katrina. I am a strong supporter of small government, drill here, drill now, and oil independence. And if Obama agrees then so be it. Let the states work this out with BP. Going after Obama because we disagree with him on every other issue seems somewhat disingenuous. It's somewhat akin to the Bush derangement people who opposed Bush on every issue just because he was Bush. Certainly the MSM is not blaming Obama for the oil spill the same way they would have blamed Bush. That's the point the talk show people are making. BP may have been negligent, but maybe they weren't. I am an engineer and I have to do dangerous tasks every day. I know the risks and I know I get paid a lot of money because I take those risks. That's how we get things done in America. And if you mess up and hurt other people you get sued, that's what the courts are for. I think the article would be a lot more interesting without so much emphasis on the politics. Facts about the cause and the effects of the oil spill. Maybe even include the history of oil rig accidents. More general information about how oil drills, especially these new deep sea oil rigs, work. That's the big element missing here. Obama is right when he states that oil rigs are generally very safe-just not these new deep sea rigs. They have to deal with an environment of extreme colds and high pressure. There are a lot of unknowns. This article needs help.
:I don't know that this article takes a stand pro or con one way or the other vis-a-vie the question of drilling. it simply chronicles the actual facts and events--something other media neglect and/or distort. Wikipedia, for example, to my knowledge to this day a month after has nothing about the Gulf oil spill disaster, both an environmental & far larger economic disaster to an international region. It does have an extensive article about a lost rig laying at the bottom of the gulf, though. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 23:32, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

== Deepwater Workers killed in the blast ==

Given that the liberal media has basically ignored the eleven men killed in the blast (when was the last time you heard any of their names mentioned?) it might be nice if we could mention them in the article. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 22:38, 11 June 2010 (EDT)

== "Oil rigs today generally don't cause spills..." ==

Is there a reason why this quote is featured in large letters at the top of the article? It's a perfectly correct statement, but it's not a very enlightening one. If it's pointing out the folly in Obama's handling of this, I'm sure there are better quotes that we can use. This one is a perfectly reasonable and accurate thing to say. I would suggest alternative quotes, but I don't know what goal we're trying to achieve with them. [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 00:31, 2 September 2010 (EDT)

Essay:Best New Conservative Words

2010-08-24T17:53:53Z

ChrisGT90: /* Conservative words and terms */ Blank description for anti-Christian. See talk page for why.

[[Image:Tax-spend.jpg|thumb|480px|The "tax-and-spend" slogan stuck to Harry Hopkins like a well-fitted suit.]]Each year the English language develops about a thousand new words. The [[King James Version]] of the [[Bible]] contains only about 8,000 different words,<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8013859.stm</ref> and many good words have developed since then.

[[Conservative]] terms, which express [[conservative insights]], are being generated at a faster rate, and with much higher quality, than [[liberal]] terms are. This implies an inevitable conservative triumph over liberalism.

Powerful, insightful new conservative terms have grown at a [[geometric progression|geometric rate]], roughly doubling every century. For every insightful new conservative term originating in the 1600s, there are two new terms originating in the 1700s, four new terms in the 1800s, and eight new terms in the 1900s, for a pattern of "1-2-4-8". This implies a more conservative future and a correlation between conservatism and truth. The year 1612 is our starting point: the King James Version of the Bible was published in 1611, and [[William Shakespeare]] had written nearly all his plays.

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Century
!# New Conservative Terms
!Most Prolific Periods
|-
|1600s
|20
|period following publication of [[KJV]]
|-
|1700s
|40
|[[Great Awakening|Great Awaken.]], [[American Revolution|Am. Revol.]], [[Constitutional Convention|Const. Conv.]]
|-
|1800s
|81
|1820s - political transition and conflict
|-
|1900s
|162
|1940s - [[World War II|WWII]] and postwar transition
|-
|2000s
|14 (preliminary)
|
|-
|}

==Conservative words and terms==

{{clear}}
{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!New Term
!Origin date
!Comments
|-
|[[accountability]]
|1794
|
|-
|[[action-at-a-distance]]
|1693
|[[Newton]]'s acceptance of this concept -- which became fundamental to [[electrostatics]] and [[quantum mechanics]] and has a basis in Christianity<ref>''See, e.g.'', [[Jesus]]'s cure of the centurion's slave.</ref> -- was central to the development of his theory of gravity.<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/newton-philosophy/#ActDis</ref> Einstein criticized this concept as "spooky".
|-
|activism
|1915
|this differentiates conservatives from inactive people; this term might have originated in connection with [[Prohibition]] and efforts to pass the [[Eighteenth Amendment]]
|-
|aerobics
|1967
|invented by the Christian Dr. Kenneth H. Cooper<ref>http://www.christianadvice.net/famous_christians.htm</ref> to describe his self-help, revolutionary program to improve health, he entitled his ground-breaking book in 1968 ''Aerobics''.
|-
|alarmism
|1867
|needless warnings, as in the politically motivated claims of [[global warming]]
|-
|alcoholism
|1860
|excessive or addictive drinking of alcohol
|-
|algorithm
|1894
|an efficient and consistent step-by-step methodology for achieving a goal, the opposite of [[liberal style]]
|-
|altruism
|1853
|selfless assistance of others; this also occurs in the animal kingdom, and is a [[counterexample to evolution]]
|-
|ambulance chaser
|1896
|a lawyer who searches for victims to persuade them to sue for his profit
|-
|[[American dream]]
|1911<ref>1911 is the date given by the "OED", which refers to the Oxford English Dictionary. The Merriam-Webster dictionary gives a date of 1931.</ref>
|the idea that one’s work should be rewarding.
|-
|American Way
|1930s
|later conservative entrepreneurs used this to coin a new name for what became a highly successful and uniquely American business model: "Amway"
|-
|[[anti-Christian]]
|1900s
|
|-
|anticompetitive
|1952
|interfering with open competition and the enormous benefits that flow from it
|-
|antilife
|1929
|critical term describing a tendency to oppose life and lifesaving care
|-
|apple pie
|1780
|honesty, simplicity, wholesomeness. Relating to, or characterized by traditionally American values. <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apple%20pie Merriam-webster- Apple pie]</ref>
|-
|assimilate
|1880s<ref>estimate only; this originated sometime in the late 1880s.</ref>
|the desired absorption of immigrant groups into the culture and mores of the resident population
|-
|attention span
|1934
|correlated with intelligence, the attention span is how long someone can concentrate on something. It is rapidly shortening; the Lincoln-Douglas debates 150 years ago lasted for hours, but none do today.<ref>http://www.help4teachers.com/ras.htm</ref> The average length of sentences in speech is another indication of attention span, and it has been shortening significantly.
|-
|baby boom
|1941
|an increase in birthrate, which is a good thing; note that the baby boom actually started before World War II, contrary to what textbooks teach.
|-
|[[bailout]]
|1951
|wasting taxpayer money to rescue, temporarily, a failing company
|-
|bedrock
|1840-1850
|an American term for unbroken solid rock underneath fragments or soil, which adopted the figurative meaning of strong values: "bedrock principles"<ref>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bedrock</ref>
|-
|beltway mentality
|1986
|popularized by [[Paul Weyrich]] though possibly first used by then-Governor [[John Sununu]] ("captives of yourselves"), it refers to a governing style that sees only as far as the highway that surrounds its capital, especially the one around D.C.
|-
|biased
|1649
|
|-
|Big Brother
|1949
|government constantly watching its citizens; [[George Orwell]] first coined this term in his classic, ''[[1984]]''
|-
|Blame America Crowd<ref>Or "Blame-America-First Crowd"</ref>
|1984
|Michael Barone quoted [[Jeane Kirkpatrick]] as saying that the "San Francisco Democrats" (site of the Democratic National Convention in 1984) "always blame America first."<ref>http://www.creators.com/opinion/michael-barone/the-blame-america-first-crowd.html</ref>
|-
|blank check
|1884
|irresponsibly giving someone unlimited spending authority or power, as in "a Con Con would be a blank check to destroy the nation"
|-
|[[Blue Dog Democrat]]
|1995
|a person who adheres to conservative principles within the Democratic party, once called a Boll Weevil; as of 2009 there are 45-50 Blue Dog Democrats in the [[House of Representatives]], which is enough to form a majority with [[Republicans]]
|-
|boondoggle
|1935
|"popularized during the [[New Deal]] as a contemptuous word for make-work projects for the unemployed." <ref>http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=boondoggle&searchmode=none</ref> The term gained popularity in [[Canada]] following a corruption scandal tied to the [[Liberal]] government in 2000.
|-
|bootstrap
|1913
|unaided effort, personal merit, hard work
|-
|bork
|1988
|coined by William Safire to refer to how Democrats savage a conservative nominee, such as their defeat of Supreme Court nominee [[Robert H. Bork]].
|-
|born-again
|1961
|it takes an open mind and heart
|-
|brainstorm
|1894
|a burst of productive thought
|-
|brainwashing
|1950
|derived from the Chinese term "xǐnǎo" soon after the [[communist]] takeover of China, "brainwashing" means forced abandonment of [[faith]] in favor of regimented [[atheism]]. In a more general sense, it refers to the manipulation and control of the human mind through torture and propaganda techniques.
|-
|brinkmanship
|1956
|the art of displaying a willingness to use military force in order to obtain a just resolution to a conflict between nations
|-
|[[bureaucracy]]
|1818
|
|-
|busywork
|1910
|meaningless activity under the pretense of accomplishing something
|-
|can-do
|1903 <ref> according to the Oxford English Dictionary. [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/can-do Miram-webster] gives the date of 1945 </ref>
|Phrase coined in a short story by [[Rudyard Kipling]] that has come to refer to an attitude that espouses individual ability and responsibility and not reliance on [[entitlements]]
|-
|[[capitalism]]
|1850-1855
|creating jobs and wealth based on a private invention, ownership and investments rather than state-controlled resources
|-
|[[carpetbagger]]
|1868
|a politician who moves to a new area to be elected to a government position, as in [[Hillary Clinton]] moving to [[New York]] to become a U.S. Senator
|-
|catharsis
|1775
|facilitating forgiveness and spiritual renewal by expression, as in writing or teaching or confession
|-
|caucus
|1763
|citizens or representatives gathering to meet and reach political decisions as a group while harnessing aspects of the [[best of the public]]; a favorite term of President John Adams, who wrote the Massachusetts Constitution and played a role in developing the [[Declaration of Independence]]
|-
|chaperone
|1720
|care and well-being of youths overseen by adults
|-
|citizen's arrest
|1941
|private enforcement of the law without the need of a taxpayer-funded police officer
|-
|civil defense
|1939
|civilians protecting themselves and their community against attack or natural disasters
|-
|claptrap
|1799
|pretentious, verbose, and often liberal nonsense; example usage: "the professor wasted the rest of the class on his liberal claptrap"
|-
|closed shop
|1904
|a business that requires membership in a union as a condition of working there; 22 conservative states prohibit this
|-
|[[Coase theorem|Coasean]]
|1980s
|an efficient result or bargain based on market forces without the distortions caused by [[transaction costs]]
|-
|Columbian
|1757
|relating to Christopher Columbus ''or the United States''
|-
|Cold War
|1947
|recognition that communist nations were at war with American freedom even in the absence of actual military conflict
|-
|competitive
|1829
|
|-
|Con Con
|1980s
|popularized by [[Phyllis Schlafly]] to highlight the deception and risks inherent in proposed national constitutional conventions
|-
|conservation of charge
|1949
|overall charge does not change in an isolated system; it is neither created nor destroyed; the concept was first suggested by [[Benjamin Franklin]] but the date of origin for this term is surprisingly recent
|-
|[[conservative]]
|1831
|
|-
|[[conservative field]]
|1870s?
|a type of physical force over a region such that items moving throughout the region can store energy ''without loss'', as in the planetary system and electrical products<ref>The mathematical definition of a conservative field -- which arises in [[multivariable calculus]] -- is that a scalar potential exists for the function and, alternatively, it is [[irrotational]].</ref>
|-
|constant
|1832
|(noun) something unchanging in value
|-
|constitutionality
|1787
|its date of origin is the year of the [[Constitutional Convention]] that proposed the [[U.S. Constitution]]
|-
|coolant
|1926
|a fluid, typically water, that facilitates efficient energy production, especially nuclear energy to cool a reactor and slow down the fission of neutrons
|-
|copacetic
|1890s<ref>Merriam-Webster officially lists its date of origin as 1919 and its source as unknown, but that is well after when Robinson says he developed it.</ref>
|Bill “Bojangles” Robinson, tap dancer extraordinaire, claimed the invention of this word; it was first popularized by African Americans
|-
|copyright
|1735
|extending private property to protect expressive works
|-
|correlate
|1742
|(verb) to show that one thing relates to another, such as [[atheism]] or [[homosexuality]] and selfishness or lack of charity; [[liberal]]s falsely rely on anecdotes to deny the general relationship
|-
|[[countability (Mathematics)|countability]]
|1874
|[[Georg Cantor]], loathed by the leading contemporary [[mathematicians]], developed this in proving that the real numbers are ''uncountable''
|-
|counterexample
|1957
|an example that is contrary to the proposition. A common point in logical, reasoned debate.
|-
|crackpot
|1884
|crazy talk, lunacy, a person on the fringe of reality
|-
|[[creation science]]
|1970s
|a term coined by the anti-[[evolution|evolutionist]] [[Henry Morris]].<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/28/AR2006022801716.html</ref>
|-
|cross-examination
|1824
|the most effective tool against [[liberal]] [[deceit]], better than even the requirement of an oath
|-
|crystal clear
|1815
|liberals are the opposite
|-
|[[culture war]]
|1991
|widespread use after the book ''Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America'' by James Davison Hunter
|-
|cyberbullying
|2000s
|a type of obnoxious and hurtful liberal behavior on the internet
|-
|[[deadweight loss]]
|1930s<ref>Confirmation of the first use is desired.</ref>
|the loss in overall wealth and efficiency imposed by monopolies and taxation, due to the loss in extra value that someone would have received beyond what he would have paid for a good at a free market price
|-
|death tax
|1989
|interestingly, the term was coined by Canadians opposed to the high estate tax on their assets held in the United States; Frank Luntz is credited with later popularizing this term in the United States.<ref>''See'' Dr. Frank Luntz, ''Words That Work: It's Not What You Say, It's What People Hear''</ref>
|-
|decentralization
|1846
|the dispersion of power, as in a shift from national to local control
|-
|decrypt
|1935
|military code-breaking, which played an instrumental role in World War II in deciphering enemy codes that many felt were unbreakable; illustrates the "can do" approach of conservatism in a patriotic way
|-
|[[defeatism]]
|1918
|a negative attitude that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy
|-
|deflation
|1891
|an increase in the value of savings
|-
|defund
|1948
|refers especially to termination of government funding of a wasteful or hurtful program
|-
|deliberative assembly
|1774<ref>''Introduction to Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised'' (19th Ed. 2000), xxv.</ref>
|used by Edmund Burke in describing the British parliament during a speech to voters in Bristol; he meant a body of persons meeting to discuss and decide common action under parliamentary law
|-
|demagogue
|1648
|
|-
|[[deregulation]]
|1963
|Reagan won in 1980 by campaigning on this.
|-
|design by committee
|before 1958
|pejorative term directed against collective production by a group
|-
|despotism
|1727
|a ruler with unlimited powers
|-
|[[deterrence]]
|1861
|
|-
|devalue
|1918
|describing an unwelcome attitude or act, as in "devaluing human life"
|-
|devotee
|1645
|ardent follower, supporter, or loyalty to. 56 years separates devotee and devoted
|-
|disinformation
|1950s
|false information spread (and sometimes manufactured) by groups with a strong political agenda
|-
|division of labor
|1776
|increasing productivity through specialization of labor, as in a husband working in manufacturing while his wife cares for children
|-
|domino effect
|1966
|how the fall of one nation to communism can result in its harmful spread to neighboring nations
|-
|double standard
|1894
|applying harsher criticism against one group, such as churchgoers or conservatives, than against another group, such as atheists or liberals; recognition of a double standard by the [[Prodigal Son]] led him to repent and convert
|-
|doublethink
|1949
|a term first coined by [[George Orwell]] in his dystopian novel ''[[1984]]''; it means simultaneously holding contradictory beliefs, which is a characteristic of [[status worship]]
|-
|doubting Thomas
|1883
|someone who believes only what he can see and touch, and doubts all else
|-
|dumb down
|1933
|
|-
|Eagle Scout
|1913
|the highest rank in the [[Boy Scouts]], the term also means "a straight-arrow and self-reliant man."<ref>Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (1994).</ref>
|-
|editorialize
|1856
|"to introduce opinion into the reporting of facts"<ref>Merriam-Webster (1994).</ref>
|-
|[[efficiency]]
|1633
|ultimately from the Latin ''efficientem'', meaning ''"working out, or accomplishing"''<ref>[http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=efficient Online Etymological Dictionary]</ref>
|-
|egotism
|1714
|the root of atheism, as explained by Paul in Romans 1:21-22; the root of depression and anxiety also
|-
|[[elementary proof]]
|1865
|a mathematical proof based on the minimum assumptions associated with real analysis; term probably does not predate [[complex analysis]] and its first use may have been the English mathematician James Joseph Sylvester's paper, "On an elementary proof and generalisation of Sir Isaac Newton's hitherto undenionstrated rule for the discovery of imaginary roots."<ref>http://www.archive.org/stream/circular129johnuoft/circular129johnuoft_djvu.txt</ref>
|-
|[[elitism]]
|1950
|
|-
|[[entitlement]]
|1944
|
|-
|entrepreneur
|1852
|
|-
|[[ethnic voting]]
|1900s
|widely recognized and even advocated by some,<ref>http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/5/2/3/4/p152345_index.html</ref> yet the dictionary doesn't yet recognize it
|-
|Eurosceptic
|1970s
|someone who opposes joining the super-socialist [[European Union]]; some prefer the term "Eurorealist" to express this opposition, and sometimes "Eurosceptic" is used to criticize opponents of the EU
|-
|exceptional
|1787
|same year of origin as the [[U.S. Constitution]]!
|-
|exculpatory
|1781
|often used in the phrase "exculpatory evidence," it took nearly 50 years to develop this term after origination of the legal term suggesting guilt: "incriminate"
|-
|faith healing
|1885
|
|-
|[[falsifiability]]
|1934
|first emphasized by Karl Popper in 1934, this helps define science: if a proposition is false, then it can be shown to be false. If not, then the proposition is not scientific.
|-
|[[family values]]
|1916
|widespread use after a speech by Vice President [[Dan Quayle]], 1992
|-
|father figure
|1934
|someone who fulfills the essential role of a father
|-
|[[federalism]]
|1789
|the unique system of dual sovereigns, state and federal (national), established by the [[U.S. Constitution]]
|-
|feedback
|1920
|an all-important element of accountability and improvement, and a key consideration in good engineering design
|-
|[[fellow traveller]]
|1925
|may have existed earlier, but popularized in 1924 by Leon Trotsky. Describes a sympathizer of a cause but who does not formally belong to the cause, such as a [[communist]] sympathizer who is not part of the communist party. The term was invented by the communists in its original, non-negative sense, but the conservatives were the first to use it as a pejorative term.
|-
|[[Flip flop (politics)|flip-flop]]
|1976
|''verb'', meaning to change political position, typically due to [[liberal]] pressure. First used by the Republican S.I. Hayakawa campaign to describe California Democratic incumbent U.S. Senator John Tunney, whom Hayakawa defeated in an upset.
|-
|force-feed
|1901
|what liberals do to students in [[public schools]] today in training them to be [[atheist]]ic socialists
|-
|forward-looking
|1800
|planning for the future rather than dwelling on the past
|-
|Founding Fathers
|1914
|the several dozen [[Christian]] men <ref>[http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html Religious Affiliation of the Founding Fathers of the United States of America, Adherents.com]</ref> who helped draft the formative documents of the United States
|-
|[[free enterprise]]
|1820
|
|-
|free market
|1907
|
|-
|free world
|1949
|areas of the world free of communism
|-
|frontiersmen
|1814
|living and working in a self-sufficient manner and with courage in a new land.
|-
|galvanize
|1802
|as in, "the liberal proposals ''galvanized'' the grassroots in opposition"
|-
|gang up
|1925
|group pressure
|-
|gateway drug
|1982
|abuse of alcohol/marijuana eventually leads to harder drugs cocaine/heroin
|-
|gerrymandering
|1812
|coined by a newspaper editor to criticize the manipulation of the lines of a new district into a salamander shape<ref>http://www.allbusiness.com/information/publishing-industries/251259-1.html</ref> that favored election of a liberal politician
|-
|gimmick
|1922
|originally meant a deceptive mechanical device for controlling a [[gambling]] machine, and then its meaning expanded to include all trickery to attract attention
|-
|globalism
|1997
|MW states it was first used in 1943<ref>http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/globalism</ref> and the OED gives a date of 1965 for the exact term 'globalism'<ref>http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50095613/50095613se2?single=1&query_type=word&queryword=globalism&first=1&max_to_show=10&hilite=50095613se2</ref> the term "globalization" was first used in the mid-1980s in a different, complimentary sense.
|-
|godsend
|1820
|
|-
|go-getter
|1921
|
|-
|gold standard
|1831
|the highest standard; in currency, when money could be exchanged for a fixed amount of gold
|-
|Good Samaritan
|1640
|how genuine charity is the best approach
|-
|goon
|1926
|a dim-witted thug, espec. one who intimidates on behalf of a union
|-
|[[grade inflation]]
|1975
|the tendency by Liberal educationalists and public schools to increase marks, irrespective of merit or actual achievement.
|-
|[[grassroots]]
|1901
|
|-
|Great Awakening
|1730-1740
|Christian spiritualism recurs periodically. See [[Essay:The Coming Fifth Great Awakening in America]].
|-
|Gresham's law
|1858
|the tendency in a free market for bad money (which loses its value) to drive out (be used more often in transactions) than good money (which retains its value), because people want to horde the good money while getting rid of the bad money; a similar effect can be seen when profanity drives out intelligent discussion
|-
|groupthink
|1952
|a style of thought consisting of conformity to a manufactured consensus and self-deception; coined by William H. Whyte in 1952.
|-
|hallmark
|1721
|purity, authentic, official seal, distinguishing feature
|-
|hardworking
|1774
|
|-
|harmless error
|1861
|an insignificant violation of a duty or procedural rule; first used in ''Western Ins. Co. v. The Goody Friends'', 29 F. Cas. 764 (S.D. Ohio 1861) (referring to a duty)
|-
|hatchet job
|1944
|still looking for the context of its first use; today it means an article, typically by a liberal, that misleadingly smears someone, typically a conservative
|-
|Hawthorne effect
|1962
|the increase in achievement resulting merely from being observed; this was demonstrated by experiment at the Hawthorne Works of Western Electric in Cicero, Illinois
|-
|heckler's veto
|1965
|coined by University of Chicago Law Professor Harvey Kalven, Jr., a strong supporter of free speech in politics, this term has been used in [[Supreme Court]] decisions by Justices [[Sam Alito]],<ref>''See'' ''Pleasant Grove City v. Summum'', 129 S. Ct. 1125 (2009); ''see also'' ''Child Evangelism Fellowship of N.J., Inc. v. Stafford Twp. Sch. Dist.'', 386 F.3d 514 (3rd Cir. 2004).</ref> [[Antonin Scalia]], and [[Clarence Thomas]].<ref>''Good News Club v. Milford Cent. Sch.'', 533 U.S. 98 (2001)</ref>
|-
|Hobson's choice
|1649<ref>this term has the entertaining history of originating with an English liveryman who required customers to "choose" the horse closest to the door.</ref>
|an ostensible choice that disguises a lack of freedom, because each alternative is completely unacceptable. This term is invoked to criticize an illusory freedom of choice. This term has been used in 48 cases by Supreme Court Justices, more often by conservatives than by liberals.
|-
|honor system
|1903
|an approach to discipline that emphasizes and encourages trust, honesty and personal responsibility rather than constant supervision
|-
|[[homeschool]]
|1980<ref>the OED assigns a date of origin of 1850 to "homeschool".</ref>
|
|-
|[[homosexual agenda]]
|1989
|used to promote the agenda in the book ''After the Ball'', but then used to criticize the movement by Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] in his dissent in''Lawrence v. Texas'' (2003)''
|-
|human rights
|1766
|rights of all peoples, such as to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" as set forth in the [[Declaration of Independence]]
|-
|hypothesis
|1656
|a suggestion, typically scientific in nature, which must be tested and proven before asserted as truth
|-
|hysteria
|1801
|From the Latin ''hystericus'', from Greek ''hystera '' meaning ''"womb"''<ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hysteria Meriam Webster Dictionary]</ref> (an old notion that hysteria was caused by the [[womb]]).
|-
|identity politics
|1988
|exploiting politics for racial, ethnic, gender equality.
|-
|illiteracy
|1660
|liberals seek to produce illiterate voters who lack independence, and many graduates of the [[public schools]] are illiterate today
|-
|incidental inequality
|2009
|inequalities that result as side effects of an objectively just system
|-
|incoherent
|1626
|the term often applies to liberal [[double standard]]s
|-
|incompleteness
|1931
|a system of logic or mathematics that includes propositions that are impossible to prove or disprove; term coined as a result of [[Kurt Godel]]'s work in 1931
|-
|incrementalism
|1966
|imposing bad political or social change slowly
|-
|independence
|1640
|free will
|-
|individualism
|1827
|values, rights and duties arise from the individual
|-
|inflationary
|1920
|policies causing inflation of the monetary supply
|-
|informed consent
|1967
|consent to surgery is meaningful only if informed, a requirement that should apply to abortion
|-
|initiative
|1793
|self-starting first step toward improvement
|-
|insightful
|1907
|what conservatism is about: gaining insights into the truth, and bettering individuals and society with them
|-
|intangible
|1914
|something valuable that cannot be seen or touched, such as goodwill
|-
|intellectual property
|1845
|"we [should] protect intellectual property, the labors of the mind, productions and interests as much a man's own, and as much the fruit of his honest industry, as the wheat he cultivates, or the flocks he rears." ''Davoll v. Brown'', 7 F. Cas. 197 (Cir. Ct. Mass. 1845) (Woodbury, federal judge).
|-
|interventionism
|1923
|"governmental interference in economic affairs at home or in political affairs of another country"<ref>Merriam-Webster (1994).</ref>
|-
|invisible hand
|1776
|coined by Adam Smith in the ''Wealth of Nations'' and widely used today.
|-
|[[invisible hand of marriage]]
|2008
|discovered on Conservapedia, it is the unseen force of productivity that results from marriage (only between a man and woman).
|-
|Iron curtain
|1945
|coined by Winston Churchill in a speech in Missouri just after World War II, to describe the communist's figurative wall against freedom
|-
|[[irreducible complexity]]
|1996
|coined by [[Michael Behe]] as a structure or system that could not possibly have evolved, because removing any part makes it nonfunctional, thereby showing that [[God]] must have created it whole into biology; if the [[Nobel Prize]] were not dominated by [[atheism]], Behe could win one for this insight.
|-
|ivory tower
|1910
|a description of the pampered culture of liberal [[professor values|professors]], and how far out of touch with the truth it is
|-
|John Hancock
|1903
|a personal signature, especially in a bold style that stands up for principles as John Hancock did with his signing the Declaration of Independence
|-
|[[judicial activism]]
|1947
|first coined in an article in ''Fortune'' magazine by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.,<ref>http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/278089</ref> and repeatedly used in U.S. Supreme Court opinions since 1967,<ref>''United States v. Wade'',
388 U.S. 218 (1967).</ref> yet as of 2009 [[Merriam-Webster]] dictionary still fails to recognize this widely used term.
|-
|judicial prejudice
|2009
|the bias of a judge in favor of a political correct identity group intended to rig outcome equality in favor of that group based on subjective bias rather than objective justice.
|-
|judicial restraint
|1942
|"Assuming that this court has power to act, it does not necessarily follow that it should act. ... In a number of situations, and in a number of cases, it has been held that courts should voluntarily refrain from using or asserting power. Where the use or assertion of power might be destructive of a well defined purpose of law or of a declared public policy such voluntarily imposed '''judicial restraint''' may be commendable."<ref>Osage Tribe of Indians v. Ickes, 45 F. Supp. 179, 184-85 (D.D.C. 1942) (emphasis added).</ref>
|-
|judicial supremacist
|2004
|one who advocates that the courts should be supreme over the other branches of government for certain legal issues; first coined in a book by [[Phyllis Schlafly]]; first used by the judiciary by the Michigan Supreme Court in ''Paige v. City of Sterling Heights'', 476 Mich. 495 (2006).<ref>A similar yet different concept, "judicial supremacy," was coined by [[conservative]] Supreme Court Justice [[Robert H. Jackson]] as the title of his book,'' The Struggle for Judicial Supremacy: A Study of a Crisis in American Political Power'' (New York: Knopf, 1941).</ref>
|-
|[[judicial taking]]
|1982
|the deprivation of private property due to a court decision; this concept was introduced by conservative Justice [[Potter Stewart]] in 1967, and the term was used for the first time independently by the Michigan and Hawaii Supreme Courts in the same month (!) in December 1982, and then used often in law review articles and Circuit Court decisions in the 2000s, and then four Justices of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] endorsed the principle in a decision in 2010, with two others accepting the possibility.
|-
|[[junk science]]
|1962<ref>http://rated.com/dir/Society/Issues/Environment/Opposing_Views/Junk_Science</ref>
|the corruption of the scientific method to advance other, often political, goals (such as [[Global Warming]])
|-
|jury nullification
|1948
|the power of a jury to overrule the law and acquit an ostensibly guilty defendant; the power was established in the colonies in 1735 in the trial of [[John Peter Zenger]], but this term was first used in state court by Pfeuffer v. Haas, 55 S.W.2d 111 (Tex. Civ. App. 1932) and in federal court by ''Skidmore v. Baltimore & O. R. Co.'', 167 F.2d 54 (2nd Cir. 1948)
|-
|kiss of death
|1943
|from Judas's betrayal of Jesus with a kiss, Mark 14:44-4
|-
|kowtow
|1826
|obsequious, unthinking obedience to someone or something, used especially in the context of dictatorships and liberal belief systems
|-
|Kremlinology
|1958
|the study of the otherwise indecipherable behavior of the government of the [[communist]] [[Soviet Union]]. Refers to the Kremlin, the traditional seat of Russian government (Soviet or not).
|-
|labor camp
|1900
|forced work prison
|-
|laissez-faire
|1825
|opposing governmental interference in economic affairs beyond what is minimally necessary
|-
|lame duck
|1761
|one falling being in achievement, especially a public official whose power is limited because his term in office is set to expire without possibility of reelection.
|-
|lamestream media
|2009
|coined by Bernie Goldberg to describe the clueless [[Mainstream media]] that repeat superficial, discredited liberal claptrap
|-
|landslide
|1838
|In the political sense, an overwhelming election victory. A clear, democratic expression of popular will.
|-
|leadership
|1821
|an ability and willingness to lead, often by example
|-
|leftism
|1920
|principles and doctrine of leftists
|-
|leverage
|1830
|
|-
|life vest
|1939
|a pro-life invention
|-
|local
|1824<ref>This date refers to its first usage as a ''noun'', which is an estimate of its adoption as a concept.</ref>
|common usage: "all politics is local"
|-
|locomotive
|1829
|a great engine of economic growth during the [[Industrial Revolution]]
|-
|lone wolf
|1909
|a person who prefers to work, act, or live alone. <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lone%20wolf Lone wolf, Merriam-Webster]</ref> synonymous with self-sufficiency
|-
|loose cannon
|1973
|an undisciplined person or program that dangerously lacks forethought; used in mid-November 1976 to describe $11 billion in unspent appropriations by the Ford Administration: "'That money,' says Arnold Packer, a senior Senate Budget Committee economist who is helping Carter draw up his shadow budget, 'is like a loose cannon rolling around the deck' because a sudden reappearance of the funds could be inflationary." (''BusinessWeek'')
|-
|lunatic fringe
|1913
|coined by U.S. President [[Theodore Roosevelt]] to describe members of eccentric, radical or extremist groups<ref> http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=lunatic</ref>
|-
|machismo
|1948
|a word never used favorably by feminists!
|-
|man-hater
|1970s<ref>This was during the epic struggle -- and defeat -- of the so-called [[Equal Rights Amendment]].</ref>
|William Safire wrote in the ''New York Times'' in 1983, "Misandry, from the Greek misandros for 'hating men,' is in the 1961 Merriam-Webster New International Dictionary, and the Oxford Dictionary Supplement traces it to 1946. The word is pronounced as 'Ms. Andry,' but I wonder why we need the Greek word for it. What's wrong with good, old-fashioned man-hater?"<ref>Sunday, Oct. 30, 1983, Section 6, Page 12, Column 3.</ref>
|-
|make-work
|1923
|inefficient or useless activity that has the false appearance of being productive; a favorite endeavor of liberals
|-
|manifest destiny
|1845
|Providential design over future events, which originated in the context of expanding the United States to the Pacific Ocean
|-
|materialism
|1748
|the view of life that physical matter is all that exists; as an "ism", the term criticizes such view
|-
|melting pot
|1912
|requires "social and cultural assimilation" for successful immigration<ref>Merriam-Webster dictionary (1994)</ref>
|-
|[[meritocracy]]
|1958
|
|-
|[[microeconomics]]
|1947
|the study of the economics of the individual person or business
|-
|mindset
|1909
|close-minded point-of-view, typically in adherence to a liberal falsehood and often to the exclusion of Christ
|-
|missile defense
|1980s
|popularized by President Ronald Reagan as part of [[SDI]]
|-
|missionary
|1625
|someone sent on a mission, typically a religious mission
|-
|mobocracy
|1754
|rule by a mob, as at Wikipedia
|-
|monogamy
|1612
|this has the same date of origin as "productive", and that may not be a coincidence!
|-
|motivation
|1873
|can you believe the word did not exist before 1873?!
|-
|muckety–muck
|1912
|a pejorative term for an arrogant person who holds a title or position considered to be important by others
|-
|muckraker
|1910
|a person who searches out and publicly exposes [[deceit]]<ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/muckraker Merriam-Webster - Muckraker]</ref>
|-
|Murphy's Law
|1958
|if something can go wrong, then it will go wrong: this was a conservative insight by an engineer Edward Murphy
|-
|muscle car
|1967
|placing a powerful engine in a classic two-door car for highly efficient performance; also celebrate masculine style against erosion by feminism
|-
|myopic
|1752
|originally a term in optometry, 1990's used to describe liberals' lack of foresight
|-
|nanny state
|1978
|"Under the New Economic Policy, [the new French Prime Minister Raymond] Barre has made it clear that industrial lame ducks can no longer count on the generosity of Nanny i.e. the state - for bailing out."<ref>Leo Ryan, "Economy Shored up: France's new surge of liberalism," The Globe and Mail (Canada) (Aug. 1, 1978)</ref> Note how two powerful new conservative terms led to a third here!
|-
|negativism
|1824
|mental attitude that tends that is skeptical about almost everything, except one's own views
|-
|newspeak
|1949
|political or media expressions using circumlocution and euphemisms to disguise or distract from the truth; first coined by [[George Orwell]] in ''[[1984]]''
|-
|non-justiciable
|1922<ref>Used by the state attorneys for West Virginia (including Philip Steptoe, founder of Steptoe & Johnson) in ''Pennsylvania v. West Virginia'', 262 U.S. 553 (1923): "It is not the 'subject of judicial cognizance,' Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1, 15; Louisiana v. Texas, 176 U.S 1, 15; Missouri v. Illinois, 180 U.S. 208, 233, or 'susceptible of judicial solution.' Louisiana v. Texas, 176 U.S. 1, 18, 22; Missouri v. Illinois, 180 U.S. 208, 233, 234."</ref>
|a difficult issue that the courts should not attempt to resolve, often because it is too political in nature
|-
|non-locality
|1920s
|[[action at a distance]] at the atomic level; even though proven, it is still opposed by those who believe in [[relativity]] and still not recognized by Merriam-Webster
|-
|Old Glory
|1862
|the ''United States of America'' flag, Stars & Stripes
|-
|one-size-fits-all
|1996<ref>Was there an earlier conservative use? Frank Zappa's album cover in the 1970s does not count!</ref>
|Lee Wishing, director of communications for conservative [[Grove City College]], in criticism of how the government administers student loans: "Unfortunately, with government programs, it's one size fits all."<ref>http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/1996/dec96/er-dec96.html</ref> The 2008 Republican platform states, "We reject a one-size-fits-all approach and support parental options, including home schooling, and local innovations such as schools or classes for boys only or for girls only and alternative and innovative school schedules."<ref>http://platform.gop.com/2008Platform.pdf</ref>
|-
|one-trick pony
|1980
|a person or group that relies repeatedly on the same gimmick, as in "the media are a one-trick pony in their criticism of [[Rand Paul]]"
|-
|open-minded
|1828
|see [[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness]]
|-
|[[opportunity cost]]
|1911
|
|-
|optimism
|1759
|
|-
|originalism
|1985
|taken from original intent, The belief that the United States Constitution should be interpreted in the way the authors originally intended it
|-
|Orwellian
|1960s
|terminology or style that advances the power of big government but is hurtful or nonsensical<ref>http://www.ntu.org/main/press.php?PressID=604</ref>
|-
|ostensibly
|1765
|having an outward appearance that may not reflect the underlying truth; good potential use is Luke 3:23 in describing Jesus as the son of Joseph
|-
|parenting
|1958
|children raising
|-
|Parkinson's Law
|1955
|how bureaucracies expand regardless of the productivity, and how inefficient work expands to fill the time available for its completion
|-
|[[patent troll]]
|2001
|a company that obtains or buys up patents for the sole purpose of asserting infringement claims, and without any intention of actually manufacturing the invention; the term was first coined by Peter Detkin, in-house counsel to Intel
|-
|patriotism
|1726
|
|-
|Pavlovian
|1926
|a conditioned, automatic and unthinking response to a signal; it has been used twice by [[conservative]] Supreme Court Justices. "It is well established that this Court does not, or at least should not, respond in Pavlovian fashion to confessions of error by the [[Solicitor General]]." ''De Marco v. United States'', 415 U.S. 449, 451 (1974) ([[Rehnquist]], J., dissenting); "'[[Incorporation doctrine|Incorporation]]' has become so Pavlovian that my Brother BLACK barely mentions the [[Fourteenth Amendment]] in the course of an 11-page opinion dealing with the procedural rule the State of [[Florida]] has adopted for cases tried in Florida courts under Florida's criminal laws." '' Williams v. Fla.'', 399 U.S. 78, 144 (1970) ([[Potter Stewart|Stewart]], J., dissenting and concurring).
|-
|perpetual war
|1947
|Coined by historian Charles A. Beard,<ref>Charles A. Beard is best known for interpreting the Constitution as being primarily motivated by economic interests.</ref> it has been used most recently by [[Ann Coulter]]
|-
|[[personhood]] <ref>[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/personhood Personhood] Dictionary.com</ref>
|1955
|Inherent rights guaranteed to all human beings from the beginning of their biological development, including the pre-born, partially born. Also, the state or fact of being a person.
|-
|Philadelphia
|1682
|coined by [[William Penn]] and meaning "city of brotherly love," the concept captures the "[[best of the public]]" approach
|-
|[[phonics]]
|1684
|conservatives have long championed phonics to promote literacy, Bible-reading, and informed voters; liberals take the opposite position
|-
|phony
|1900<ref>This surprisingly recent origin appears to be derived from a British confidence game.</ref>
|needed to address [[liberal deceit]]
|-
|political machine
|1905
|a pejorative term for local and typically Democratic power structures that prevent outsiders from winning elections; first used by George Washington Plunkitt to criticize the Tammany Hall machine for which he served
|-
|[[politically correct]]
|1983
|This term originated among radicals at the [[University of Wisconsin-Madison]] to enforce radical orthodoxy, but immediately flipped in usage to become a term of mockery of radicals.<ref>For an early different usage of the word, see 1793 J. WILSON in U.S. Rep. (U.S. Supreme Court) 2 (1798) 462 Sentiments and expressions of this inaccurate kind prevail in our..language... ‘The United States’, instead of the ‘People of the United States’, is the toast given. This is not politically correct.</ref> The term may have come from Chairman Mao in 1936.
|-
|politicize
|1846
|seeking political gain at the expense of truth or quality<ref>The Merriam-Webster definition (1994 ed.) is incomplete and unclear: "to give a political tone or character to"</ref>
|-
|[[post-abortive]]
|1986
|the unexpected trauma and physical harm -- which can worsen over time -- that is experienced by a woman after having an [[abortion]]; coined by Dr. Kaye Cash in an editorial describing what she learned during a 365-mile walk in southeast Arkansas to speak with the public about abortion<ref>Editorial by Kaye Cash, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (Little Rock, AR), October 23, 1986.</ref>
|-
|potential
|1817<ref>Usage here refers to "promise", not "possibility".</ref>
|
|-
|privatize
|1940
|to return a business or enterprise from state to private control; to de-nationalize.
|-
|proactive
|1933
|
|-
|productive
|1612
|
|-
|productivity
|1810
|the gap of about 200 years between the creation of "productive" and "productivity" is astounding
|-
|[[pro-life]]
|1960
|
|-
|property right
|1853
|
|-
|provocateur
|1919
|someone who spends more time causing unproductive conflicts rather than advancing knowledge, accomplishing legitimate goals, or helping anyone
|-
|quantify
|1840
|
|-
|race card
|1995<ref>This is the date of its widespread familiarity.</ref>
|"Playing the race card" consists of relying on racial emotions or charges of racism in order to overcome the truth and logic in politics, legal proceedings, or otherwise; this term became familiar in the criticism of the defense and acquittal of O.J. Simpson for the murder of his ex-wife and her friend.
|-
|rapture
|1629
|spiritual ecstasy[http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=rapture]
|-
|[[recidivism]]
|1886
|the tendency for people lacking in [[faith]] and determination to revert to prior patterns of harmful behavior, such as repeat criminal offenders
|-
|recuse
|1949
|self-removal by a decision-maker (especially a judge) because of possible bias with respect to the pending issue
|-
|red tape
|1736
|excessive bureaucracy and procedural complexity which frustrate meaningful activity and progress
|-
|[[relativism]]
|1865
|the view that ethical truths are not absolute, but depend on the person or group that holds them
|-
|[[responsibility]]
|1737
|1787 HAMILTON Federalist No. 63 II. 193 Responsibility in order to be reasonable must be limited to objects within the power of the responsible party.
|-
|reverse discrimination
|1969
|the use of quotas or affirmative action to use race or gender to discriminate against a better qualified person
|-
|revisionism
|1903<ref>The first use of this term, now obscure, refers to a Marxist movement that preferred evolutionary rather than revolutionary change.</ref>
|distortions of history to promote liberal bias
|-
|riot act
|1715<ref>Its colloquial use, as in "read them the riot act," began in 1819.</ref>
|the Riot Act was a law passed in England in 1715 to authorize officials to disperse riots
|-
|sacred cow
|1910
|a person or idea, typically liberal, that becomes immune from criticism because of its political usefulness rather than its truthfulness, as in the theories of [[evolution]] and [[relativity]]
|-
|scapegoating
|1943
|a term criticizing how people, particularly liberals, deflect accountability and blame from themselves to others; inspired by Leviticus 16:8.
|-
|salutary neglect
|1775
|coined by the [[conservative]] [[Edmund Burke]] in his 1775 speech to the British [[House of Commons]] entitled "On Moving His Resolutions for Conciliation with the Colonies"<ref>http://www.archive.org/stream/burkesspeechonco00burkuoft/burkesspeechonco00burkuoft_djvu.txt</ref>
|-
|school choice
|1980
|popularized by Milton Friedman in his book, ''Free to Choose''
|-
|[[scientific fascism]]
|2009
|a coordinated effort by a group of scientists to enforce a certain point of view upon others.
|-
|Segway
|2001
|Dean Kamen's trademark spelling of "segue" for use of Yankee Ingenuity to improve efficiency, to refer to a form of battery-powered transportation.
|-
|[[self-defense]]
|1651
|
|-
|self-destruct
|1968
|often the tragic result of liberal falsehoods
|-
|[[Discipline|self-discipline]]
|1838
|
|-
|self-reliant
|1848
|
|-
|separation of powers
|1748
|the fundamental insight underlying the [[U.S. Constitution]]
|-
|skullduggery
|1867
|underhanded or unscrupulous behavior
|-
|slippery slope
|1900s
|term has been widely used for decades to expose the fallacy of "it doesn't hurt to try"
|-
|smoke and mirrors
|1979
|something intended to disguise or draw attention away from an often embarrassing or unpleasant issue. <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/smoke%20and%20mirrors Smoke and Mirrors, Merriam-Webster]</ref> Widely used during the 1990s to describe [[Bill Clinton]]'s political strategy.
|-
|smoking gun
|1974
|a law-and-order term, "smoking gun" was first used as figurative term in a reported judicial decision in ''Rodgers v. United States Steel Corp.'', 1975 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12775 (W.D. Pa. Apr. 20, 1975), and many literal uses of the term in court decisions before that!
|-
|[[socialist]]
|1827
|someone who advocates government control over the economy, and particularly state control of the means of production
|-
|social justice rhetoric
|2009
|Language and rhetorical ploys equating equality of outcome with justice.
|-
|spend-and-tax
|2009<ref>http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/02/morning-bell-the-obama-tax-and-spend-economy-is-here/</ref>
|a variation on "tax-and-spend" (see below), "spend-and-tax" consists of spending the money first and then trying to justify raising taxes based on the deficit created by the spending
|-
|stalking horse
|1788
|a candidate or issue that serves to increase the chances that ''another'' will win, as in "antifederalists attempted to win elections by using 'the stalking horse of amendments.'"<ref>''Centinel'', 1788 (quoted in ''The Federalist party in Massachusetts to the year 1800'', By Anson Ely Morse).</ref>
|-
|[[statism]]
|1919
|advocates for centralized government and government ownership
|-
|straightforward
|1806
|something liberals are not
|-
|straw man
|1896
|an imaginary argument or example set up for the purpose of easily knocking down, while distracting from valid arguments
|-
|Stupaked
|2010
|hurt by someone who reassured everyone he would do the right thing, but then switched at the last minute to do the opposite (refers especially to [[abortion betrayal]]s)<ref>Columnist Kathleen Parker is credited with first coining this term.</ref>
|-
|supply-side
|1976
|the economic theory that reducing taxes expands economic activity by encouraging greater earnings and investments; proven successful during the Reagan Administration in the 1980s
|-
|takeover
|1917
|as in the takeover of government by the communist revolution in that year
|-
|tax-and-spend
|1937
|not yet recognized by Merriam-Webster, it is included in dictionary.com and it means the liberal policy of raising taxes and increasing government spending
|-
|taxpayer
|1816
|the word highlights who is really paying for things
|-
|[[term limits]]
|1861
|can you believe this is not in the dictionary yet? Merriam-Webster omits it, but dictionary.com has it<ref>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/term+limit</ref>
|-
|terrorism
|1795
|this was during the French Revolution
|-
|[[textualism]]
|1952
|first used by Justice [[Robert Jackson]] in his influential concurrence in ''[[Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer]]'', 343 U.S. 579 (1952), it now describes the legal philosophy of Justice [[Antonin Scalia]]
|-
|[[think tank]]
|1940s
|first coined in [[Britain]] to describe intelligence organizations that helped the military, think tanks became part of the rise of conservatism in the 1970s and 1980s; is ''Conservapedia'' the think tank of the future?
|-
|top-notch
|1900
|the highest quality, which requires respect for merit to recognize
|-
|[[totalitarianism]]
|1926
|term which identifies the similarities of fascist and communist regimes and ideologies and urges resistance
|-
|tour de force
|1802
|a feat of skill
|-
|trademark
|1838
|extends the concept of private property to the marks used by business
|-
|traditionalist
|1856
|"adherence to the doctrines or practices of a tradition...the beliefs of those opposed to modernism, liberalism, or radicalism"<ref>http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/traditionalist</ref>
|-
|[[transaction cost]]
|1961
|Economist [[Ronald Coase]] won a [[Nobel Prize]] for this.
|-
|[[transistor]]
|1948
|named by John R. Pierce and developed at the [[conservative]] [[Bell Labs]], this invention epitomized Yankee ingenuity; Pierce was a critic of claims of [[artificial intelligence]] and was the future developer of [[Telstar]], a precursor to the [[Strategic Defense Initiative]]
|-
|tree huggers
|1970s
|still not recognized by the dictionary, this term criticizes extreme environmentalists, but they proudly use the term also to describe what they literally do
|-
|trivia
|1920
|insignificant detail, which can sometimes obscure what is important and distract people from the Bible; liberal [[Wikipedia]] is filled with trivial junk
|-
|Trojan horse
|1837
|describes a type of liberal [[deceit]]: subversion from within
|-
|trust but verify
|1980s
|popularized by President Ronald Reagan as the approach to use towards communist [[deceit]]
|-
|ugly duckling
|1883
|an unpromising appearance but often with great unseen potential
|-
|ultra vires
|1793
|beyond the authority, especially of a government or corporate official
|-
|unborn child
|1791
|the rights of the unborn child have been recognized in English law since the 1600s, but the specific term "unborn child" itself may have been first used by an attorney arguing before the New Jersey Supreme Court in ''Den v. Sparks'', 1 N.J.L. 67 (Sup. Ct. 1791)
|-
|underdog
|1887
|[[David]] v. [[Goliath]], [[Cinderella]], [[best of the public]], etc.
|-
|underemployed
|1908
|having less than full-time or suitable employment
|-
|vandalism
|1798
|malicious destruction of someone else's property
|-
|veracity
|1623
|devotion to truthfulness
|-
|vet
|1904<ref>http://www.slate.com/id/2199254/?from=rss</ref>
|a verb meaning to screen for flaws
|-
|[[victimization]]
|1840
|
|-
|volunteer
|1618
|someone who freely offers to help
|-
|wannabe
|1981
|a word that criticizes liberal [[status worship]]
|-
|War on Terror
|2001
|no listing at Merriam-Webster February 2, 2009 Obama ends use of the conservative lexicon. <ref>[http://pewforum.org/news/display.php?NewsID=17455 Obama administration drops 'war on terror' phrase] Pew Forum, February 2, 2009</ref>
|-
|waterloo
|1816
|a final defeat or setback, coined merely one year after the [[English]] defeated [[Napoleon]] at the [[Battle of Waterloo]]; there has never been a "waterloo" for [[Christianity]] or [[conservatism]]
|-
|wildcatter
|1883
|a pro-energy term that describes someone who drills for oil in fields not known to have oil
|-
|word poverty
|2001<ref>http://www.aft.org/pubs-reports/american_educator/summer2001/lang_gap_moats.html</ref>
|popularized by President [[George W. Bush]]
|-
|work (physical sense)
|1826
|a physical measure<ref>force times distance</ref> of effort used to increase energy
|-
|work ethic
|1951
|a habit of working as a moral good
|-
|worldview
|1858
|a comprehensive way of looking at life and the world; sometimes used to criticize a liberal's irrational belief system
|-
|yellow journalism
|1898
|the practice, started by newspaper publishers Joseph Pulitzer and his rival William Randolph Hearst, of sensationalizing and biasing newspaper headlines and articles in order to influence public opinion
|-
|}

__TOC__ 

== Conservative Words Not Yet Recognized by the Dictionary ==

A thousand new words are developed in English each year. Here is a growing list of conservative concepts, each of which is not yet defined by a single word or two.

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Not Yet Recognized Terms
!Suggestions
!Comments
|-
|pre-9/11 thinking
|9/10 mindset
|terror is jurisdiction of the courts
|-
|anti-family
|tradition opposer, familiopathic
|
|-
|causing harm by spreading falsehoods
|deceit
|e.g., denying or concealing disease and infertility caused by promiscuity
|-
|cradle to grave <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/spanish/from%20cradle%20to%20grave cradle to grave- no entry found] Merriam-Websters</ref>
|sanctity of life, conception to natural death
|pro-life stance, also can mean socialist entitlement programs
|-
|cut and run
|surrender advocates
|when the going gets tough, run away from the problem
|-
|[[deliberate ignorance]]
|mind-locked, self-centered pride obscuring the truth
|the term exists; the dictionary does not yet include it
|-
|denial that [[Hell]] exists
|Hell-denier? Antinfernal? (Should be "antihadessic" so as not to mix Hellenate and Latinate roots)
|
|-
|[[abstinence denial|denier of the effectiveness of abstinence]]
|abstinence-denier?
|
|-
|drive-by media
|partisan slander
|liberal mainstream media assault on the GOP or conservative principles, deceitful attacks for opposing viewpoints
|-
|[[earmark]]
|
|spending on specific projects at the request of a particular congressman, and without meaningful examination by others voting on it
|-
|easily amused by [[deceit]]
|dolophile
|from Greek/Latin root ''dolo-'' meaning guile, deceit, deception [http://www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view_unit/664]
|-
|family-friendly
|wholesome
|describes TV programming, websites, social events that are not offensive
|-
|Hatred of one's country, refusal to recognize the good elements of it, or unreasonably critical of it
|misopatria, misopatrist
|From Greek ''misein'', to hate, and Latin ''patria'', nation or homeland
|-
|heavenly body
|celestial body
|natural objects visible in the sky
|-
|hellbound
|
|recognized by over 1.3 million sites in a Google search and no substitute term is available, yet dictionaries refuse to recognize it
|-
|Hoax and Chains
|[[Keynesian economics]]
|a phonetic play on the rhetoric slogan of Hope and Change. Hope replaced by unemployment and Change represents obsessive tax burdens.
|-
|hoax plant
|fake townhall, kkk teaparty
|a term to describe a deceitful method of placing an operative that appears to be part of a group in order to push an agenda or to make a competing agenda look ridiculous.
|-
|[[Hollywood values]]
|West Coast Hedonism
|Over 800,000 results on Google, not yet recognized by Merriam-Webster
|-
|[[Illegal Alien|illegal alien]]
|
|widely used in court decisions and political discourse for years, Merriam-Webster still does not recognize it is as a term.
|-
|infotainment
|tabloid news, dramacast
|mainstream media presents drama fluff stories as news, e.g. 20/20 - Datelin
|-
|[[limited government]]
|we the people democracy
|first testament to this was the [[U.S. Constitution]], defining [[Reagan]]s presidency, can't be found in Merriam-Websters. <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/limited%20government Limited government - Not found] Merriam-Webster's</ref>
|-
|[[limousine liberal]]
|hypocrite
|rich promoting causes which they themselves don't adhere to
|-
|merit pay
|performance bonus
|Doing your job better with perks as a reward. The typical liberal union teacher avoids merit pay at all costs, self before students.
|-
|[[militant gays]]
|intimidating homosexual
|
|-
|modern idolatry
|"media idolatry"; "money idolatry"; "celebrity idolatry"
|idolatry conjures images of golden calves, and a modern version is needed
|-
|moral fabric
|domestic tranquility
|ethics and virtues united for the common good of all
|-
|morally bankrupt
|[[atheism]], self-void
|ethically and spiritually challenged souls
|-
|opposite of [[global warming]]
|regional warming
|the North pole shrinks as the South pole increases
|-
|opposite of [[materialism]]
|spiritualism and idealism have been its philosophical opposites, historically
|[[dualism]] has been suggested, but it is not the ''opposite'' of [[materialism]]; "spiritualism" is not a common term and is the "opposite" of materialism
|-
|[[peer pressure]]
|used in titles to professional journal articles as early as 1994
|can you believe that isn't recognized by Merriam-Webster?
|-
|proven wrong, a refusal to admit it
|mulism; heel-digger?
|cf. mulish. This refusal is what promoted the [[Parable of the Good Samaritan]].
|-
|religious right
|Christian conservatives
|religion in America almost exclusively a conservative institution, no religious left term in existence.
|-
|reward failure
|TARP
|too big to fail, bailout bankrupt, mismanagement subsidized
|-
|rewrite history <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/rewrite%20history rewrite history not found, Merriam-Websters]</ref>
|[[deceit]], mislead
|Commonly used term describing liberal deceit to hide, defraud others about factual history.
|-
|rogue states
|rogue nations
|nations defying international law, only rogue is listed in Merriman-Websters
|-
|runaway jury
|The term has existed for decades, but Merriam-Webster has not recognized it yet.
|
|-
|Rule of Law
|
|
|-
|[[schlockumentary]]
|propaganda film
|documentary films based on falsehoods and half-truths
|-
|[[Second generation atheist|second-generation atheist]]
|cradle atheist
|
|-
|selective outrage
|partisan hypocrisy, bipolar
|to be against something to further a cause and reject, stay silent, ignore or discount something similar.
|-
|smear merchant
|serial slander
|to constantly hurl degrading or false accusations against others
|-
|strict constructionism
|
|an important term for over 200 years to describe adherence to the text of the Constitution, Merriam-Webster still does not recognize it.
|-
|[[Conservative| Traditional Values]]
| principles of Conservatism
|much the same as family values but incorporating all aspects society; family, religion, self-sufficiency, the truth, hard work. Only listed in Merriam-Websters to describe what Nilihism is against.
|-
|true emergency
|life support
|meaning a high probability of serious injury or death to an individual or property. Emergency has been watered down, e.g. to be locked out of one's car.
|-
|Unaffected by, or impervious to, the media
|mediaproof
|cf. bulletproof. ''Once John became aware of the extent of [[liberal deceit]], he set about mediaproofing his mind''.
|-
|}

== New Liberal Terms ==

New liberal words often have deceptive, or nonsensical, meanings. Here are some new words created by liberals to combat [[conservatism]]:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!New Term
!Origin date
!Comments
|-
|[[agnosticism|agnostic]]
|1860
|someone who claims to not know whether [[God]] exists but still lives like an [[atheist]]
|-
|[[atheism|atheist]]
|1571
|useful and often deceptive alternative name for an anti-Christian
|-
|[[Big Bang theory|big bang]]
|1948
|term invented by the leading [[British]] physicist Sir [[Fred Hoyle]] to ''mock'' this suggestion of how the universe was formed, but later accepted as a serious term rather than mockery;<ref>Compare this migration with that of "politically correct," which started out as a serious term but then adopted a sense of mockery</ref> it's liberal because it trivializes the beauty and the [[faith]] of the moment
|-
|bilingual education
|1972
|a euphemism describing a costly and hurtful program that hinders the learning of English by foreign-born children in American [[public school]]s, which hurts their future opportunities
|-
|[[carbon footprint]]
|1999<ref>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/carbon%20footprint</ref>
|this term indicates an individual human's effect on the environment by production of carbon dioxide
|-
|chairperson
|1971
|even Alice Sturgis, the leading parliamentarian of the 20th century, rejected this cumbersome form of political correctness.
|-
|check-off
|1911
|automatic deduction of union dues by the employer from the employee's paycheck, so he has no choice
|-
|[[class warfare]]
|
|first entered the political lexicon primarily as an attack by liberals against conservatives. <ref>[http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20030115.html The art of "class warfare"], Ben Fritz, Spinsanity.org, January 15, 2003</ref>
|-
|[[communism]]
|1840
|
|-
|compassionate-care clinics
|2008
|a term describe pot-shops that dispense medical marijuana <ref>[http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/11/magazines/fortune/medical_marijuana_legalizing.fortune/?postversion=2009091116 How marijuana became legal, CNN, September 11, 2009]</ref>
|-
|compassion fatigue
|1968
|liberals, driven by materialistic self-interest, are likely to suffer from this.
|-
|[[condescension]]
|1647
|treating another person as though they are inferior
|-
|[[creationism]]
|1880
|like most "isms", creationism is a derogatory term coined preferred most by opponents of it.
|-
|[[Dark Ages]]
|1730
|a term coined in the so-called [[enlightenment]] to disparage the period between the fall of the [[Roman Empire]] and c.1000, when the Christian faith, and its learning and culture, spread across Europe.
|-
|[[Dead white males|dead white males]]
|
|a disparaging term used of significant figures from previous generations by those who wish to undermine [[Cultural Literacy|cultural literacy]]
|-
|deconstruction
|1973
|a style of interpretation of texts that looks beyond the plain meaning of the text in order to infer or accuse the writers of social bias
|-
|diva
|1883
|modern use to describe female Hollywood/media personalities
|-
|[[Détente|detente]]
|1970s
|a euphemism referring to pacifist policy re. the Soviet Union
|-
|displaced foreign traveler <ref>[http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2010/07/bureaucrats-now.html Bureaucrats Now Call Illegal Aliens "Displaced Foreign Travelers", Moonbattery.com, July 21, 2010]</ref>
|2010
|another politically correct term for [[illegal alien]].
|-
|distributive justice
|
|a term used to redefine socialist abridgment of rights as "just"
|-
|[[enlightenment]]
|1669
|
|-
|[[Environmentalist|environmentalism]]
|1922
|a mixture of [[pseudoscience]] and neo-[[paganism]] used to justify the imposition of [[socialist]]ic controls.
|-
|[[exclusionary rule]]
|1964
|an invented rule that requires censoring and withholding from the jury certain incriminating evidence about a criminal defendant, simply based on how the evidence was obtained.
|-
|[[family planning]]
|1939
|planning intended to determine the number and spacing of one's children through birth control <ref>[http://mw1.m-w.com/dictionary/family%20planning Family Planning, Merriam-Webster]</ref>
|-
|freethinker
|1692
|the euphemism "free" hides the hostility towards faith, which is not free
|-
|[[fundamentalism]]
|1922
|"a movement in 20th century Protestantism emphasizing the literally interpreted Bible as fundamental to Christian life and teaching"<ref>http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fundamentalism</ref> From a series of pamphlets called "The Fundamentals" which outlined the movement. Perjorative usage started when the liberal [[Harry Emerson Fosdick]] began using the term in a straw man attack against [[Conservative Christianity]].
|-
|[[feminism]]
|1895
|notionally, "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes"; in reality, the attempt to destroy traditional family, societal and religious values by erasing or undermining natural gender differences.
|-
|[[gay rights]]
|1969
|the movement for civil rights for homosexuals
|-
|glass ceiling
|1984
|the notion that an invisible barrier prevents women and ethnic minorities from reaching high office; an excuse for [[feminist]]s and others to demand [[affirmative action]]
|-
|[[global warming]]
|1969
|the baseless [[environmentalist]] mantra that the earth's temperature is rising, and that human intervention is the cause.
|-
|[[goth]]
|?
|"a style of rock music, noted especially for somber or ethereal tones and lugubrious lyrics", or someone who performs or listens to this style of music.<ref>Dictionary.com, ''goth'' [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/goth]</ref> Goths often "dress in black with heavy jewelry".<ref>Dictionary.com, ''goth rock'' [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/goth%20rock]</ref> The term is taken from the name of "a Germanic people who invaded the Roman Empire in the early centuries of the Christian era".<ref>Dictionary.com, ''goth'' [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/goth]</ref>
|-
|gun control
|1969
|a euphemism for restricting the right to keep and bear arms
|-
|[[homophobia]]
|1969
|used by Liberals to describe a failure to subscribe 100% to the [[homosexual agenda]].
|-
|[[humanism]]
|1808 <ref>http://newhumanist.org.uk/1740</ref>
|
|-
|[[human security]]
|1941
|A vague [[socialist]] concept of "freedom from want" and "freedom from fear' championed by FDR, latter by the UN.
|-
|[[imperialism]]
|1851
|a clever term later used by liberals to interfere with Christian missionaries and stopping anti-Christian tyranny
|-
|[[isolationism]]
|1922
|a pejorative term that is critical of American politicians putting America first in priorities
|-
|Keynesianism
|1946
|advocacy of 'tax and spend' policies as elaborated by the economist [[John Maynard Keynes]]; a [[euphemism]] for back-door [[Socialism]].
|-
|[[Living Constitution]]
|2000
|a continually evolving Constitution (first used by presidential candidate Al Gore, title of a 1936 book by Howard McBain)
|-
|main squeeze
|1968
|one's romantic partner, typically in an unmarried relationship
|-
|McCarthyism
|1950
|originally, investigations by Sen. Joe McCarthy of Communists working in sensitive USA government jobs. Later, it more broadly refers to holding radical leftists accountable for their beliefs and loyalties.
|-
|[[metrosexual]]
|1994
|fashion and glamour man
|-
|moderate
|late 1900s
|the original term dates from the French Revolution, but its meaning today is a euphemism for someone who favors abortion and/or supports censorship of Christianity in some ways.
|-
|[[moving the goalposts]]
|late 1980s
|a sports analogy designed to avoid answering a logical follow-up question; this is a favorite term of evolutionists to avoid addressing obvious deficiencies in their theory
|-
|nationalize
|1800
|a euphemism for the government taking over ownership and control of a large company or entire industry, as in socialism
|-
|natural selection
|1857
|a misleading and euphemistic term for the theory that genetic advantages and conflict dictate survival
|-
|[[Nihilism]]
|1817
|a rejection of the values system, independently anarchist from society norms.
|-
|[[population control]]
|1968
|the issue of population dates back to Confucius. Liberals promoted the term after the book The Population Bomb by Paul R. Ehrlich
|-
|[[pro-choice]]
|1975
|a euphemism for insisting on taxpayer-funded [[abortion]]; people who claim to be pro-choice typically oppose ''informed'' choice, which makes the "choice" meaningless
|-
|[[progressivism]]
|1892
|the progressive movement was not entirely liberal; it was started by a Republican and shared some goals with conservatives, and still does
|-
|[[psychoanalysis]]
|1906
|contributed to de-spiritualization of human beings
|-
|public option
|2009
|obfuscate rewording of government control
|-
|[[quote mining]]
|non-existent
|a term used by [[evolutionists]] to describe taking quotes out of context in order to damage the position of the quoted party.
|-
|reproductive health
|1994 <ref>defined by the United Nations (UN) in 1994 at the Cairo International Conference</ref>
|abortion supporters jargon for rights/justice for pregnant women, no rights/justice for the child.
|-
|[[Sexual Discrimination|sexism]]
|1968
|That which is practiced by those who do not give total support to [[feminism]].
|-
|shovel-ready <ref>[http://skylineviews.typepad.com/skyline_views/2009/04/is-it-time-to-add-shovelready-to-the-dictionary.html Is it time to add shovel-ready to the dictionary? Skyline Views, April 24, 2009]</ref>
|2008
|jobs and people ready to work if funded
|-
|situation ethics
|1955
|a euphemism for denying fixed ethical standards
|-
|stimulus packages
|2009
|used by government(s) to be perceived as taking unprecedented measures to stimulate aggregate economic demand; during a crisis on economic growth and private jobs, liberal government entities are known to deceptively take advantage of its subject in the form of "stimulus packages," as an opportunity to pursue policies that further social and environmental agendas.<ref>[http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/12/62/42555546.pdf For a stronger, cleaner, ''fairer'' world economy], ''Organisation For Economic Co-Operation and Development'' (OECD), 2010.</ref>
|-
|strict liability
|1869
|court-imposed liability even when there is no evidence of any fault by the defendant
|-
|sustainability
|1727
|[[environmentalism|environmentalist]] buzzword
|-
|Swift-Boating
|2004
|allegations of unfair campaign tactics.
|-
|transforming society
|2008
|Obama, Rahm and Axelrod use this term. It dates to [[Saul Alinsky]] and Chicago politics. <ref>[http://marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930# Mark Levin Show, July 7, 2009]</ref>
|-
|transnationalist
|2006
|popularized by Yale Law School Dean Harold Koh in a 2006 law review article: "The transnationalists view domestic courts as having a critical role to play in domesticating international law into U.S. law ...."<ref>Penn State Law Review (2006).</ref>
|-
|undocumented immigrant
|2000
|a [[politically correct]] replacement for illegal alien.
|-
|unfair
|1700
|
|-
|union shop
|1904
|
|-
|[[Unitarian]]
|1687
|
|-
|will to power
|1907
|[[Nietzsche]]'s concept of the drive of a superman to perfect himself by exercising creative power; it didn't catch on
|-
|woman's rights
|1833
|women equal to men; the defining movement to justify aborting babies in the 20th century
|-
|}

== Rate of Generation of Liberal Terms ==

The rate of generation of liberal terms is increasing, but not with the enduring value of the conservative terms and not with their geometric rate of increase. A remarkably high percentage of new liberal terms originated in the 1960s, suggesting that new liberal terms arise in a sporadic manner heavily influenced by culture:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Century
!# New Liberal Terms
|-
|1600s
|4
|-
|1700s
|2
|-
|1800s
|11
|-
|1900s
|32 (9 in the 1960s)
|-
|2000s
|6
|-
|}

== Terms Difficult to Classify ==

These new terms are difficult to classify:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Term
!Origin date
!Comments
|-
|[[affirmative action|affirmative action]]
|1961
|first used in [http://www.thecre.com/fedlaw/legal6/eo10925.htm JFK's Executive Order 10925] in 1961 and subsequently promoted by [[LBJ]].
|-
|[[American exceptionalism]]
|1980<ref>An estimate; it originated no later than 1983.</ref>
|coined by sociologist Daniel Bell, its meaning today is unclear; it is used to urge exporting American-style elections to the rest of the world as urged especially by [[neoconservatives]].
|-
|Americanism
|1781
|Originally, a phrase unique to American English, later, loyalty to America and its principles
|-
|bipartisan
|1909
|emphasized by liberals when they are in the minority in power, but ignored by liberals when they are the majority in power
|-
|colonist
|1701
|settlers of a new country
|-
|compartmentalize
|1925
|compartmentalizing the Bible away from knowledge and education leads to ignorance and despair
|-
|eclectic
|1683
|taking the best from among different styles or ideas; compare [[best of the public]]
|-
|evangelism
|1620-30
|"isms" are usually pejorative, though this acquired a positive meaning over time, and perhaps from the outset
|-
|genetics
|1905
|perhaps this should be on the conservative list?
|-
|inane
|1662
|refers to comments, often made by liberals, that are utterly devoid of substance
|-
|junk legislation
|1980s
|used initially by liberals to complain about the lack of meaningful legislation
|-
|missionary
|1635-1645
|conservative?
|-
|multitasking
|1966
|performing multiple tasks all at once
|-
|polar coordinates
|1694
|Newton may have used it earlier
|-
|republican
|1685
|
|-
|scrooge
|1843
|the main character in Charles Dickens' ''A Christmas Carol''; the story is based on materialism and is often used as a substitute for the Biblical account, but charity is a conservative value
|-
|smoke and mirrors
|1982
|describes the use of deceit, particularly in politics; probably a conservative term, but will await more etymology about it
|-
|soapbox
|1907
|now used pejoratively, but probably not initially when it was a way for the public to participate
|-
|states' rights
|1790
|liberals often invoke this too; Democrats were its biggest champions in the 1800s (in connection with slavery), and even today on issues like legalizing drugs and same-sex marriage
|-
|technocrat
|1932
|technical expert
|-
|telecommute
|1974<ref>The first use of this term was in the British magazine ''The Economist''.</ref>
|a combination of a Greek root ("tele", which means "far off") and a Latin root ("commutare", which means "to exchange")
|-
|tomfoolery
|1812
|playful or foolish behavior
|-
|traditionalism
|1856
|"beliefs of those opposed to [[modernism]], [[liberalism]], or [[radicalism]]"
|-
|[[twilight zone]]
|1949
|the realm of imagination that seems impossible but is difficult to disprove, and which challenges ordinary views of reality; also the terminator between night and day on a planetary body
|-
|wiki
|1995
|a website (or website software) that facilitates contributions and corrections by the public
|-
|}

== Downgraded Conservative Terms ==

These conservative terms are less significant:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Term
!Origin date
!Comments
|-
|byzantine
|1794<ref>The usage here -- in sense of complex governmental rules -- probably developed later.</ref>
|
|-
|connive
|1601
|to pretend ignorance
|-
|eleemosynary
|1616
|relating to charity
|-
|[[entropy]]
|1868
|
|-
|[[filibuster]]
|1851
|
|-
|incandescent
|1794
|bright and radiant, conquering darkness, precursor to the invention of the incandescent lamp (light bulb)
|-
|luddite
|1811
|one who opposes and even destroys technological advances
|-
|media
|1923
|
|-
|[[milquetoast]]
|1933
|timid and unassertive; easily persuaded or exploited
|-
|normalcy
|1920
|related to the election of [[Warren G. Harding]] by the largest margin yet in history
|-
|ne'er-do-well
|1736
|"an idle worthless person" - Merriam-Webster
|-
|reticent
|1834
|restrained in expression, presentation, or appearance
|-
|self-indulgence
|1753
|
|-
|smart aleck
|1856
|an obnoxiously conceited and self-assertive person with pretensions to being superior to others. Etymology: Aleck, nickname for Alexander <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smart%20alec Smart Aleck Merriam-Websters]</ref>
|-
|}

== Sources ==

*[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ Merriam-Webster dictionary]
*[http://dictionary.reference.com/ Dictionary.com]

== See also ==

*[[Essay:Conservapedia's Law]]
*[[Essay:Surprising Dates of Origin for Terms]]
*[[Linguistic Analysis of Candidates]]
*[[Conservative Bible Project]]

{{Conservatism}}
{{Conservapedia}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}
[[Category:Essays]]
[[Category:Conservative Bible]]
[[Category:Featured articles]]

Talk:Essay:Best New Conservative Words

2010-08-24T17:52:51Z

ChrisGT90: /* 33 million sites turn up in a Google search for "anti-Christian" - Wrong! */

'''[[/archive1 | Archive 1 ]]''' 
'''[[/archive2|Archive 2 ]]'''
----

==Mother Nature==
In the New Liberal Terms section, I put the term Mother Nature in the list. Is it right?--[[User:Willminator|Willminator]] 18:40, 22 April 2010 (EDT)

I won't argue whether or not Mother nature is a liberal term on the grounds that I think the distinction between conservative and liberal words is dubious at best, however it is most certainly not a new word. The idea of mother nature is as old as the ancient greeks or older. --[[User:BenjaminS|Ben]] [[User Talk:BenjaminS|Talk]] 18:46, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

:That's a clever way to dispose of a vexing question.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:56, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

Well I don't want to waste your time by arguing the point Mr. Schlafly. If you want to put the term back in feel free. --[[User:BenjaminS|Ben]] [[User Talk:BenjaminS|Talk]] 19:24, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

How is it dubious? Also, I haven’t heard of any writings or speeches where the term Mother Nature was used hundreds of years ago. Show me at least one speech or writing where the term was used. Liberals use it to discredit Father God’s role in creation. They think that it was nature, not God, who made us. To Liberals, nature is their goddess. Funny how Wikipedia’s article on Mother Nature denies the atheistic, evolutionary and environmental implications of the term.--[[User:Willminator|Willminator]] 19:55, 22 April 2010 (EDT)

:Look up "Gaia" or "Terra Mater" - "Mother Nature" or "Mother Earth" has been around thousands of years. [[User:PaulBurnett|PaulBurnett]] 22:23, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

::The idea of personifying all of nature as a woman surely predates the liberalism of 20th century and early 21st century America. But the way in which the natural world came into existence, specifically the planet Earth which supports all life known to exist, is unknown to science: speculation is not "science" unless expressed as a theory to which a counterexample could conceivably be found (see [[falsifiability]]).

::Those scientists who deny God's role in [[Creation]] are committing the same intellectual offense they accuse [[intelligent design]] theorists of. It is also not "science" to comment on metaphysical ideas, unless we grant that the scientific method can be applied to matters beyond [[physical science]].

::The trick which liberals are playing with their anti-conservative words is to pretend that they are talking about one thing, while they are actually talking about another. This is literally the oldest trick in [[Bible|the book]]; recall that the serpent tempting Eve told her, "You will not die" yet Jesus explained later on many occasions that "life" and "death" correspond to being able or unable to love God. So eating the forbidden fruit did indeed cause Eve's death. (See verses like, "You have the name of being alive, but you are dead" in Revelations and, "Let the dead bury their own dead" in Luke 9)

::We need precise definitions of words, to prevent being tricked and fooled by deceivers with a hidden agenda. The so-called "[[peace movement]]", for example, never wanted [[peace]] but simply the victory of America's anti-[[democracy|democratic]] enemies. The "save the earth" movement is not at all concerned with preserving the environment for the well-being of human beings: it's an excuse to increase centralized control over resources, in a way which will destroy prosperity, hurting the world's poor more than any one else.

::Now it's a matter of personal belief for me that God has a feminine aspect; my church specifically teaches that the [[Holy Spirit]] is feminine, and that God is a being whose harmonized masculinity and femininity are reflected in men and women (see Gen. 1:27) but I won't preach here. The issue is the relationship between Nature and human beings.

::Liberals claim that science has proved [[Evolution]] without providing any evidence for it, let alone discussing a means by which the theory might be falsified (thus providing a highly prominent example of [[pseudoscience]]). Then they misuse this idea to hint that science has also discovered the source of the physical world ([[Big Bang]] theory) and the [[origin of life]]. Of course, when pressed, they must concede that the Theory of Evolution does not tell us how life came into being. But high school biology textbooks write about life as if it simply "evolved" from inorganic chemicals. This, by the way, is a great example of how New Liberal Words are misused to trick people. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 07:10, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

:::That's a fascinating analysis, Ed. Thank you for sharing it. I appreciate the suggestion that the [[Holy Spirit]] is feminine. Usually groups of people, like nations or large audiences, are considered to be more feminine than masculine in nature.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:13, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

== "Bully pulpit" ==

How about "bully pulpit"? When Teddy Roosevelt coined this, "bully" meant something like "excellent" rather than overbearing.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:47, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

I guess it's kind of like the word gay. At first gay meant happy and now it means something else.--[[User:Willminator|Willminator]] 19:55, 22 April 2010 (EDT)

==Definition==

I think this article needs a clear definition of what is meant by "conservative words." As I was reading it, I found it unclear as to whether it's about words invented by Conservatives or words representing Conservative values. I gather it's the latter, but I had to look in the talk page to find that. Either way, the introduction to the article isn't very clear and I'm reluctant to write a definition since I'm not sure I'm on the same page as the contributors. Would someone care to do that? [[User:EMorris|EMorris]] 13:49, 2 June 2010 (EDT)

== 33 million sites turn up in a Google search for "anti-Christian" - Wrong! ==

For the term "anti-Christian" the article claims "thirty-three million sites turn up in a Google search."

Where did this number come from? Go to Google and type in "anti-Christian" (in quotes) and you get 945,000 hits. Type in "anti-Christian" (NOT in quotes - which is totally sloppy Googling) and you get 7,590,000 hits. Where did the "thirty-three million" come from? [[User:PaulBurnett|PaulBurnett]] 22:11, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

: That's an interesting observation, Paul. The number of Google links retrieved for the search "anti-Christian" has fallen substantially. That begs the question of why.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:18, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

::Should we correct that number in the article? [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 22:41, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

:::Please improve as you think best!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:58, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::The user who added that ([[User:DrewDice]]) was subsequently blocked for prevarication. The one-million figure Andy added seems about right in my searches. [[User:KyleDD|KyleDD]] 23:05, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

:::::Before you round the number down, consider rounding it up. [http://www.google.com/search?q=anti+Christian&hl=en&lr=lang_en&as_qdr=all&prmd=inl&sa=X&ei=eQldTN2RGIWBlAeU8uCbCA&ved=0CBEQpwU&source=lnt&tbs=lr:lang_1en,cdr:1,cd_min:,cd_max:] The answer is 74.6 million. Google anti Christian with no quotes, no hyphens, English language only. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 03:24, 7 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::That is true, but such a Google search would include Christian sites about "[[pro-life|anti-abortion]]" stances or "[[homosexuality|anti-Biblical]]" lifestyles. [[User:KyleDD|KyleDD]] 21:43, 17 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::A good indication that my search results are accurate can be judged by the first 10 page results, nothing but anti-Christian in the title. Does it include anti-abortion and anti-American? Possibly, we are talking 78 million pages but I didn't see any through the top 10. I frown on the smaller number of 1 million.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:14, 17 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::I'm sorry you feel that way. A good indication that your search results are inaccurate can be judged by using the "Search within results" function. Half a million of your results pertain to the Christian "anti defamation" commission. Another half million are for "anti abortion". 184,000 deal with "anti immigration". And the list goes on and on...173,000 are about the punk rock band "Anti-flag". I'm sure hundreds of thousands more results are about things that people named Christian don't like. The only way to accurately gauge the use of the phrase "anti Christian" on Google is to search for that phrase, not its components. [[User:KyleDD|KyleDD]] 11:50, 18 August 2010 (EDT)

:::::::::I did a search for anti-Christian both with and without the hyphen when Paul Burnett first brought the issue up, and both returned the same number of hits (about the 7.5 million he mentioned). I think that Jpatt may have misread the number and moved the decimal place over. Even now, I'm only getting 10.8 million hits, both by typing in what Jpatt described or by clicking his link. I'm changing the article now to say 10 million, but I think the number should ultimately be removed. It just changes to quickly for the article to stay up-to-date unless somebody is going to check every morning. Also, on the first page of ten results, on is a list of anti-Christian movies, one is lamenting the anti-Christian bias in America, and one is against anti-Christian defamation. If you want to only use the first 10 results as a sample of the 10 million (which anybody who's taken a statistics course would tell you is a horrible idea), about 30% of those results are nothing hostile towards Christianity. [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 23:12, 18 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::::JPatt's search results extended further into the past than a normal google search. For the same reasons I explained to him, your 10 million number is inaccurate (you can verify by searching within your results). I'm changing it back to 1 million for the time being, but maybe you're right that it should be removed outright. No one doubts that it is a widely-used term. [[User:KyleDD|KyleDD]] 17:54, 20 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::::::There are 10.8 million results when you search anti-Christian on Google. The claim being made was not that there were X million results hostile towards Christianity, just that there were X million results. No attempt was made at qualifying them, and the statement in the article does not indicate any attempt at qualifying them. It doesn't matter if only one in ten of those results is actually something anti-Christian; the claim is only about how many results there are. I'm changing it back to 10 million, because that's how many results there are (not good results, or relevant results, just results in any form). With that being said, it is a fairly pointless claim to make, because we don't know how many of those results actually '''are''' anti-Christian, we only know that they make some reference to "anti-Christian." [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 20:17, 21 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::::::I'm blanking the description on this term. The number of Google results is subject to wide variation, and the number of Google results is hardly an informative piece of information, as per discussion above. The term '''is''' included in the unabridged Merriam-Webster dictionary ([http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/antichristian Link]). I don't know of a suitable replacement description, so I'm just going to leave it open to somebody else. [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 13:52, 24 August 2010 (EDT)

== Adding Obama Portmanteaus ==

I've noticed the list does not have any of the Obama portmanteaus, like [[Obamanation]], [[Obamunism]], etc. Shouldn't these terms be added? They are great for described the unfortunate turn this country is taking. [[User:JonS|JonS]] 17:13, 27 June 2010 (EDT)

== Underdog ==

Conservative term imho. Seeker of greatness against the odds. Cinderella story. David (underdog) slays Goliath. The meek (underdog) shall inherit the Earth. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 03:09, 10 July 2010 (EDT)

: I agree that "underdog" is a conservative term, and I will promote it now. Thanks for mentioning this.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 08:42, 10 July 2010 (EDT)

== Excellent scholarship ==

In the face of such well founded scholarship, Liberals will never manage to disprove the remarkable growth pattern illustrating the doubling per century of Conservative words. Nevertheless, perhaps the essay could be improved slightly by adding that Conservative words are words that express a Conservative concept or words that are used significantly more often by conservatives than Liberals. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 17:20, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

: Not sure what confusion you're trying to clear up here. Conservatives words express insights that are conservative. These words are freely available to liberals and conservatives alike, though liberals may indeed irrationally try (in a fool's errand) to avoid using them.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:34, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

::The essay begins by mentioning Conservative terms, then a list of Conservative words and terms follows, nowhere in the essay is it made clear what Conservative words or terms actually are. That, I think, should occur at the beginning of the essay. Supplying a definition of what a Conservative term is, will underpin the observation that the data supplied irrefutably proves a "1-2-4-8" geometric increase for new conservative terms. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 14:51, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

:::Definition by example seems best here. Other proposed definitions are, of course, welcome.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:35, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

::Other definitions are not required, your own excellent, clear and concise definition that Conservatives words express [[conservative insights]] is more than adequate. However, [[definition]] by [[example]] begs the question, are the words in the list because they are Conservative or are the words Conservative because they are in the list? [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 15:48, 31 July 2010 (EDT)

:::The terms are obviously Conservative independent of being in this list. You wouldn't request a definition for "List of Words beginning with G", so why are you demanding a definition for "Conservative term"? Are the component words of the phrase that obtuse for you? We're not using them in any aberrant way. --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 18:04, 31 July 2010 (EDT)

::::Nowhere did I demand a definition, I merely suggested that providing one would underpin the excellent scholarship presented in the essay. G is a well established concept amongst literate people. "List of Words beginning with G" is a definition, therefore it logically does not require a definition. The term 'Conservative words' is not as well established as G, therefore a definition helps those unfamiliar with the term understand it and benefit from Mr Schlafly's excellent insights. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 16:57, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

:::::What you say cannot be true, because in the world I live in, people know and understand what "conservative" means, and they don't need it spelled out for them. Talking about the "excellent scholarship presented in this essay" smacks of sarcasm from the tone of the rest of your post. If you were a ''real'' conservative, you wouldn't have to be asking what a "conservative word" was. --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 21:29, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

::My suggestion to elaborate was in order to elucidate the term 'Conservative words' not the word 'Conservative'. The elucidation is intended for visitors unfamiliar with the term, not for myself. Many come to Conservapedia seeking an alternative to the atheistic anti-Christian misinformation, gossip and pornography prevalent elsewhere on the internet. Elucidation enables such people to better understand and appreciate what Conservapedia has to offer, and may facillitate bringing them into the fold, so that they may also profit from the many [[Essay:Conservative Benefits|Conservative benefits]]. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 18:01, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

:::If liberals are so devoid of intelligence or honesty to clearly understand the simple application of an adjective to a noun, then why should we dumb down our article just for their pea-sized brains? --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 21:57, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

"AmandaBunting" (if that really is your name), I've reviewed your contributions and you're not doing much more than talk, talk talk. We conservatives favor substantive contributions to this project, so if all you can do is complain on talk pages, Wikipedia might be a better place for you and your misguided ideology. It's obvious you're not here to help anyone learn. [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 18:18, 31 July 2010 (EDT)

:I am neither complaining nor have I a misguided ideology. I am simply making substantive suggestions about how I think this excellent essay may be improved. As a Conservative I would have expected more [[Chivalry|chivalrous]] behaviour here, there is [[Essay:Rules of Chivalry for Students|much you can learn]] from Conservapedia. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 16:57, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

::But you didn't suggest a definition, even though one would have been (and still is) welcome from you. Wikis are not answer boxes; they are places where people contribute ideas and ''substantive'' edits, and then others improve them.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:34, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

:::I had already mentioned that other definitions are not required because you had already supplied supplied an excellent, clear and concise definition that Conservatives words express Conservative insights. I have added that to the essay, furthermore the definition itself links to the insightful article [[Conservative insights]]. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 17:38, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

== Maggie Thatcher ==

Great article. How about some of Margaret Thatcher's great new conservative terms:
* U-turn: What liberal politicians do all the time
* There is no alternative: Liberals pretend that they have an alternative to conservative values
* Oxygen of publicity: What liberals want to give to terrorists
* Fight to win: What conservatives should do!
[[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 19:03, 14 July 2010 (EDT)
:Get this! Adding those four terms takes the total for the 20th century to 160 - we're getting very close to a perfect geometric progression. [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 19:07, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

:: Thanks for the suggestions, but I'm not sure the above terms meet the high quality level of the entries. Perhaps because "Maggie" was actually not very conservative by American standards? She seemed fine with nationalized health care, for example.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:29, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

== Possibility ==

''quack'', coined 1638, to refer to charlatans deceiving others with pseudoscience. Used extensively today to describe the favorite "medicines" of new-age liberals. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 20:40, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

: Interesting and informative suggestion. However, the term strikes me as name-calling rather than insightful. I'm not sure its use would be consistent with our rules!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:26, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

== Kiss of Death ==

The term "Kiss of Death" clearly originated earlier than 1943, as the article would suggest, as there was [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiss_of_Death_%281916_film%29 a 1916 film by that name]. In fact, I'm not convinced this was the origin of the term, which has probably been in use since Judas' betrayal. [[User:DanieleGiusto|DanieleGiusto]] 22:01, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

: Your link to Wikipedia is broken, and the movie was probably a literal rather than figurative use of the word. Merriam-Webster gives a date of 1943.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:24, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

::Fixed the link; thanks for the heads-up. [[User:DanieleGiusto|DanieleGiusto]] 13:38, 16 July 2010 (EDT)
-

== Possibility for 1800's: Carpetbagger ==

While the term originally related specifically to northern politicians interjecting themselves into the politics of the Reconstruction-era south, it has since come to be used for political opportunists in a more general sense. Since this sort of behavior is common among Democrats (Hillary Clinton, anyone?) I'd argue that the term has value as a conservative word. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 12:52, 19 July 2010 (EDT)

: "Carpetbagger" is a fascinating suggestion. [[Hillary Clinton]] and [[Robert F. Kennedy]] were modern senatorial examples. Perhaps there are other modern examples also.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:45, 19 July 2010 (EDT)

:::Well...hmm. There's John Garamendi, the former lieutenant governor of California, who ran for election to the House in a district where he didn't live. His defense, as I recall, was "Well, I don't live there, but my front yard's in the district." (It wasn't.) --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 17:26, 19 July 2010 (EDT)

== Research method ==

I just wanted to point out that actively looking for words to fit the geometric rate of growth, from a scientific point of view, is a biased method of research. You will ALWAYS find words in a 1-2-4-8 geometric growth rate, if that's what you actively look for. A more neutral research method would be to ***randomly*** (I can't stress it enough, it MUST be random) pick up, say, 1000 words created after 1600, and see if they match that growth rate.

This method CAN lead to a scientific result, mind you, but only after ALL words created after 1600 have been taken into account, whether they match the growth rate or not. Feel free to refute my reasoning if I made a logical flaw in it, and if you think that actively choosing words to fit a 1-2-4-8 growth rate has scientific validity, please explain me why I am wrong. Thank you! --[[User:MarcoT2|MarcoT2]] 11:35, 20 July 2010 (EDT)

== Suggestion? ==

What does everyone else think about ''militant atheist''? I had to listen to someone rail at me for being a Christian on the train this morning '''for an hour''' and it got me thinking. I've been hearing the term since I was a kid, but that would probably fall into the 20th century. William Ayers anyone? My argument in favor is that most of them try to pass themselves off as peaceful, tolerant, etc, when (only my opinion here) that isn't really the case. We should call it as we see it here. I can't provide a year, but maybe someone with more experience can? What do you think? [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 13:23, 20 July 2010 (EDT)

== Selection Bias and Proposal for an Unbiased Test ==

===Selection bias===
The easiest way to see this is the history of your finds: You have repeatedly achieved what you call a perfect layer (1-2-4-8) of new conservative words, i.e. 1 word of the 17th century, 2 of the 18th century, 4 of the 19th century and 8 of the 20th century.

What's the probability to get a perfect layer? Here are the probabilities for the century of origin of a random conservative words, assuming that your insight is correct: 

<table><tr><th>Century</th><th>Probability</th></tr><tr><td>17th</td><td>1/15</td></tr><tr><td>18th</td><td>2/15</td></tr><tr><td>19th</td><td>4/15</td></tr><tr><td>20th</td><td>8/15</td></tr></table>

For a layer, we have to take 15 words. It's easy to calculate the probability that these 15 words form a perfect layer:

15!/(8!×4!×2!×1!) × (1/15)1 × (2/15)2 × (4/15)4 × (8/15)8 = 675675 × 234 / 1515 =0.0265

2.65% is the probability to chose 15 words and get a perfect layer instead of 2-1-4-8 or 1-2-5-7... And how often was this remarkable deed performed?

That you were able to repeat this process for a couple of times shows that you were actively (though not necessarily consciously) looking for words to match your pattern, i.e., you showed a selection bias - a kind of affirmative action for newer words...

: Selection bias exists in any study. The issue is not whether there is selection bias (there always is), but whether the selection bias is so great that it disqualifies the results. Unless there were a strong underlying pattern of increase by century, it would be almost impossible even with high selection bias to attain the resulting pattern of doubling by century.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:51, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

::*''Selection bias exists in any study. '' But most scientists try to avoid it (even in the social sciences), and try to monitor its effect. They most certainly should not embrace it as a way to make their point (that is, they are called on it when they do so...)
::*''Unless there were a strong underlying pattern of increase by century, it would be almost impossible even with high selection bias to attain the resulting pattern of doubling by century.'' But [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law|Conservapedia's Law]] doesn't claim that ''their is a increase by century''. No, it explicitly states that ''conservative insights increase over time at a geometric rate, as in 1-2-4-8-16-etc. For example, there is a doubling in effective new conservative terms per century.'' While their may an increase over the centuries, the rate of this increase (doubling, i.e. an increase by 100% by century) is an artefact of the way you perform your search: That is, even if the real rate is 70% , 130% - or 83% (the [[maximum likelihood estimator]] for your current set of words taken into account the year of their creation), you end up with a perfect fit of 100% - unless you have enumerated ''all'' conservative words at least for one century.
::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:44, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

===An unbiased test===
Andy, f you are interested in testing your insight, I really would like to help you. The hidden table below contains 500 words which - according to the Merriam-Webster - originated between 1600 and 2000. The list was generated by taking words of the ubuntu-dictionary at random and checking their age automatically via the site of Merriam-Webster. This was repeated until 500 feasible words were found. 

If you mark each conservative word with an "r" (and perhaps each liberal word with an "l"), we'll get an estimate of the percentage of conservative words - and a fairly unbiased distribution over the time.

Please be aware that the distribution of this sample doesn't follow a geometric law. Here are the number of words by century of origin:
<table><tr><th>Century</th><th>Number of Words</th></tr><tr><td>17th</td><td>151</td></tr><tr><td>18th</td><td>84</td></tr><tr><td>19th</td><td>161</td></tr><tr><td>20th</td><td>104</td></tr></table>

: Your proposed test is an interesting one, and I do see far more conservative words from the 1700s than the 1600s. Indeed, I'm pleasantly surprised how many conservative words show up in your random selection, as I never claimed that conservative (or liberal) words were a substantial percentage of all new words generated.

:That said, the defect in your proposed test is the weakness in dictionaries publishing more recent new conservative words from, say, the 1900s. Dictionaries are good at defining old words, but not-so-good at recognizing and defining relatively new concepts. That's what we need Conservapedia for! :-).--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:07, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

::*''That said, the defect in your proposed test is the weakness in dictionaries publishing more recent new conservative words from, say, the 1900s. '' That's hardly a fatal flaw which would render the test useless. But we can even circumvent it: Let's just concentrate on the period 1600-1899! As you acknowledge that ''dictionaries are good at defining old words'', in the next list you will find 500 words from these three centuries. I assume that [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law|Conservapedia's Law]] should hold not only for the 20th and the 21st century. (the list is a wikitable with two columns, just add a marker for a conservative word in the second column. I omitted the years of the creation of the words (all taken from the Merriam-Webster) and I would advice you against checking the age before marking a word - though of course the age of quite a few words is apparent)
::*A dictionary is the obvious choice when talking about the number of words. But you are absolutely right that dictionaries are biased towards older words. I assume that the percentage of words in general use which were created in the 20th century is much higher than those of the 17th century! When one is interested only in the distribution of conservative words , one could sample over Conservapedia's articles, and try various methods to get the age of the newest words used. But this is of course more cumbersome than just looking into a dictionary, so I'll postpone it for a while.
::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:47, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

===Table of random words===
{|class="collapsible collapsed"
!500 words
|-
|1 economics
2 storeroom
3 hunkers
4 sufficing
5 coffeehouses
6 stalagmites
7 therapy
8 sanitation
9 cheapskates
10 Caesareans
11 ringmaster
12 acclimate
13 penology
14 verandah
15 caregivers
16 fed
17 disengaged
18 whitecaps
19 dissertation
20 consignment
21 chainsaws
22 speeds
23 kinfolk
24 caribous
25 hobbyists
26 coefficients
27 protuberance
28 morphemes
29 Caroline
30 millionaires
31 recyclable
32 wilts
33 unreconstructed
34 chandeliers
35 palomino
36 joysticks
37 volleys
38 cajoling
39 bucksaws
40 spars
41 portaged
42 acoustically
43 humanize
44 hybridize
45 tipsters
46 overprices
47 marksmanship
48 fezes
49 depressant
50 auctioned
51 flamethrower
52 biking
53 artistic
54 agribusiness
55 jottings
56 pedicures
57 Cordilleras
58 slots
59 recording
60 unrealistic
61 rationalism
62 peacekeeping
63 aromatherapy
64 jackknife
65 champagne
66 horrendous
67 Quasimodo
68 excavator
69 chowders
70 arts
71 configure
72 civic
73 telegraphy
74 sweepstakes
75 euphoric
76 strategy
77 subgroup
78 shouting
79 gusher
80 telemarketing
81 glucose
82 booties
83 preponderated
84 manures
85 outspokenness
86 wiener
87 embeds
88 amped
89 sternums
90 empathy
91 cognomina
92 colitis
93 kimono
94 retched
95 singletons
96 megaphoned
97 respelled
98 Hindus
99 squiggle
100 irrigates
101 reconstructions
102 deceptiveness
103 colonialism
104 missioned
105 dyes
106 maladroit
107 tents
108 turfs
109 generalization
110 seamanship
111 duffers
112 scruffier
113 pollinate
114 bobcats
115 achieved
116 exerted
117 flapjack
118 Independence
119 lucidity
120 indenturing
121 enumerable
122 disenchanted
123 flashback
124 trilogies
125 colloquially
126 Colby
127 killjoys
128 lifelines
129 hydrotherapy
130 psychoanalysis
131 memorializing
132 bronchitis
133 rink
134 automobiles
135 dandy
136 schoolmarms
137 debriefing
138 glands
139 oceanography
140 jetted
141 hurdler
142 dependability
143 tactician
144 rotor
145 liturgies
146 quantified
147 wests
148 quitters
149 ocarinas
150 betting
151 apathetically
152 smoggier
153 Xenia
154 saris
155 dupe
156 voodooism
157 optimize
158 particularization
159 funereally
160 masterminding
161 capsizes
162 orchestrates
163 uncivilized
164 emphasized
165 skyrocket
166 plagiarist
167 politicoes
168 streptococci
169 pantsuits
170 waving
171 decontaminates
172 teensy
173 taxonomy
174 proselytizes
175 drollness
176 expectoration
177 legmen
178 modulations
179 diploma
180 Brandy
181 radar
182 pushiest
183 drill
184 lush
185 temperas
186 musicals
187 wheal
188 horticulture
189 cancan
190 jocularity
191 caramels
192 bipolar
193 sophisticated
194 injudicious
195 emulsion
196 ignore
197 cannonballed
198 swastika
199 overachievers
200 rubella
201 chuckhole
202 ersatz
203 breeziness
204 climaxes
205 explosiveness
206 empathizing
207 jumps
208 secularizing
209 sequoia
210 bibliography
211 prettying
212 bouldered
213 authorship
214 vocalizing
215 tarpons
216 camisoles
217 cowpox
218 tans
219 breathable
220 machines
221 tycoon
222 flicking
223 squishes
224 semiprofessional
225 feline
226 seedling
227 hankie
228 entitlement
229 abscissa
230 derisive
231 romance
232 overprice
233 beads
234 stipple
235 Kitty
236 jewelled
237 mascaraed
238 dissociation
239 moments
240 Spica
241 quaking
242 legislation
243 wobbly
244 scorches
245 books
246 gastrointestinal
247 finked
248 renegotiates
249 flautists
250 wrongheadedness
251 allergenic
252 squishiest
253 kickoffs
254 mecca
255 disses
256 woodwinds
257 discotheques
258 replacements
259 tomahawks
260 voluptuaries
261 salon
262 eliciting
263 resale
264 soporific
265 dosage
266 smokestacks
267 rationalists
268 subsumed
269 futzes
270 minutemen
271 stingrays
272 marathoner
273 vagina
274 propellers
275 rooftops
276 sensationalist
277 bluejackets
278 individualize
279 hyphenating
280 Xanthippe
281 federated
282 amortize
283 airfare
284 hyphenates
285 syncopates
286 sermonizing
287 biochemistry
288 babysat
289 yellows
290 riskier
291 cassocks
292 stated
293 Cordoba
294 Slinky
295 eventfully
296 nines
297 blabbermouths
298 fraternizes
299 bucked
300 Boolean
301 bivalve
302 ricochetted
303 toys
304 toted
305 commissars
306 cushioning
307 redeploy
308 poignancy
309 variegating
310 snuffbox
311 stoplight
312 biochemists
313 bicycling
314 disenfranchised
315 nosing
316 enlightenment
317 knockout
318 resurgent
319 pediments
320 skyscrapers
321 treatments
322 polio
323 flashbulbs
324 empower
325 rounding
326 pervasive
327 humped
328 oxymora
329 freebie
330 passageway
331 barfing
332 motorists
333 triglycerides
334 Mayans
335 stopped
336 kidnapper
337 pensioning
338 foreclosures
339 Yankees
340 manifestoing
341 predictor
342 Delawares
343 librettos
344 panoply
345 angstroms
346 jodhpurs
347 backpedal
348 sugars
349 preclude
350 unravelling
351 Lilliput
352 motivator
353 enslavement
354 pencilling
355 flukey
356 amoral
357 depository
358 unemotional
359 stumpy
360 cartons
361 gal
362 ignitions
363 malingered
364 spotlighted
365 photographic
366 abnegated
367 dashing
368 atrocious
369 inanities
370 derricks
371 mountaineer
372 inseminate
373 sacrosanct
374 modernize
375 specializations
376 obliging
377 heckles
378 baccalaureates
379 bluebirds
380 lengthiest
381 octets
382 physiotherapist
383 disorganizing
384 toffees
385 unfurling
386 abnegate
387 bathrobe
388 socked
389 crepe
390 polkas
391 overwriting
392 punned
393 platoons
394 infrared
395 ensuring
396 decimate
397 baggiest
398 plungers
399 trampolining
400 centigram
401 Topsy
402 epochal
403 boogies
404 showrooms
405 pianofortes
406 Orphic
407 logbooks
408 amphibious
409 rapprochements
410 terms
411 Kalmyk
412 petering
413 geocentric
414 stills
415 ethnologist
416 exec
417 flairs
418 likableness
419 rods
420 melange
421 graduated
422 ante
423 voluminously
424 impaled
425 cognacs
426 yups
427 comfiest
428 strychnine
429 subsoiled
430 conics
431 Salish
432 windsocks
433 rutabaga
434 vacuumed
435 maestri
436 podiatrist
437 restructured
438 metrically
439 motorcade
440 zipping
441 unmoral
442 electioneered
443 minibikes
444 trillion
445 sudsier
446 actuator
447 acing
448 masochism
449 softeners
450 cocksucker
451 brig
452 verbs
453 buccaneer
454 confessed
455 filibustered
456 rearmed
457 melodramatics
458 swivelled
459 veggies
460 monochrome
461 hellos
462 escalators
463 Seyfert
464 bushwhack
465 encapsulation
466 combining
467 realists
468 playgrounds
469 teenage
470 glandular
471 tot
472 cyclical
473 tinsmith
474 commitment
475 undersells
476 orthopaedics
477 yardstick
478 Vivian
479 peppy
480 swatted
481 earlobes
482 snapshots
483 nitpicker
484 unities
485 depressants
486 briefing
487 halo
488 watermarking
489 electronics
490 inadequates
491 ghosted
492 rapscallions
493 snorkeler
494 percentages
495 relapsing
496 facet
497 inconsistently
498 takeout
499 acidify
500 password
|}
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:15, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

'''Second table: 500 random words 1600-1899'''
{|class="wikitable sortable collapsible collapsed"
!word
!date
!class
|-
|monsignor||align="right"|1607||C
|-
|productive||align="right"|1612||C
|-
|alertly||align="right"|1618||C
|-
|inconsistent||align="right"|1620||C
|-
|numerical||align="right"|1628||C
|-
|interlock||align="right"|1632||C
|-
|platoons||align="right"|1637||C
|-
|forevermore||align="right"|1641||C
|-
|identification||align="right"|1644||C
|-
|untenable||align="right"|1647||C
|-
|reversible||align="right"|1648||C
|-
|authentication||align="right"|1652||C
|-
|monotheistic||align="right"|1660||C
|-
|constructive||align="right"|1680||C
|-
|alphabetize||align="right"|1691||C
|-
|misconduct||align="right"|1705||C
|-
|propagandists||align="right"|1718||C
|-
|revelations||align="right"|1729||C
|-
|guaranteed||align="right"|1731||C
|-
|cohesiveness||align="right"|1731||C
|-
|systematizing||align="right"|1767||C
|-
|letdown||align="right"|1768||C
|-
|dissident||align="right"|1769||C
|-
|diagramming||align="right"|1785||C
|-
|backhanded||align="right"|1800||C
|-
|autocratically||align="right"|1823||C
|-
|socialistic||align="right"|1827||C
|-
|Mormonisms||align="right"|1830||C
|-
|westernize||align="right"|1837||C
|-
|trademarks||align="right"|1838||C
|-
|propagandized||align="right"|1844||C
|-
|graffito||align="right"|1851||C
|-
|Americans||align="right"|1855||C
|-
|optimize||align="right"|1857||C
|-
|outdistancing||align="right"|1857||C
|-
|rogues||align="right"|1859||C
|-
|birthrates||align="right"|1859||C
|-
|slob||align="right"|1861||C
|-
|quantifier||align="right"|1876||C
|-
|implode||align="right"|1881||C
|-
|housemother||align="right"|1882||C
|-
|scantier||align="right"|1600||
|-
|sierras||align="right"|1600||
|-
|arena||align="right"|1600||
|-
|toddled||align="right"|1600||
|-
|eventful||align="right"|1600||
|-
|catheter||align="right"|1601||
|-
|primarily||align="right"|1601||
|-
|labeling||align="right"|1601||
|-
|copings||align="right"|1601||
|-
|Pooh||align="right"|1602||
|-
|respectively||align="right"|1602||
|-
|embroiling||align="right"|1603||
|-
|haloes||align="right"|1603||
|-
|Iliad||align="right"|1603||
|-
|enthusiasm||align="right"|1603||
|-
|dragoons||align="right"|1604||
|-
|promised||align="right"|1604||
|-
|recollecting||align="right"|1604||
|-
|stentorian||align="right"|1605||
|-
|rivaling||align="right"|1605||
|-
|impregnates||align="right"|1605||
|-
|touchy||align="right"|1605||
|-
|impassive||align="right"|1605||
|-
|immediacy||align="right"|1605||
|-
|literary||align="right"|1605||
|-
|animosities||align="right"|1605||
|-
|volatile||align="right"|1605||
|-
|vegetates||align="right"|1605||
|-
|acclaiming||align="right"|1606||
|-
|onlooker||align="right"|1606||
|-
|sides||align="right"|1606||
|-
|wisher||align="right"|1607||
|-
|melancholia||align="right"|1607||
|-
|tab||align="right"|1607||
|-
|typical||align="right"|1609||
|-
|casuist||align="right"|1609||
|-
|bucolic||align="right"|1609||
|-
|footfalls||align="right"|1610||
|-
|bison||align="right"|1611||
|-
|lambing||align="right"|1611||
|-
|ticketed||align="right"|1611||
|-
|incompatibilities||align="right"|1611||
|-
|demonstrators||align="right"|1611||
|-
|reproduces||align="right"|1611||
|-
|longish||align="right"|1611||
|-
|amalgamations||align="right"|1612||
|-
|bailing||align="right"|1613||
|-
|caste||align="right"|1613||
|-
|convulses||align="right"|1614||
|-
|abscess||align="right"|1615||
|-
|valise||align="right"|1615||
|-
|cult||align="right"|1617||
|-
|hesitancy||align="right"|1617||
|-
|drill||align="right"|1619||
|-
|blotchy||align="right"|1619||
|-
|urban||align="right"|1619||
|-
|appositeness||align="right"|1621||
|-
|ingratiated||align="right"|1621||
|-
|ingrate||align="right"|1622||
|-
|diplomata||align="right"|1622||
|-
|exporters||align="right"|1623||
|-
|drolly||align="right"|1623||
|-
|adrift||align="right"|1624||
|-
|powwow||align="right"|1624||
|-
|oaf||align="right"|1625||
|-
|preconceptions||align="right"|1625||
|-
|ruse||align="right"|1625||
|-
|abominating||align="right"|1628||
|-
|dodo||align="right"|1628||
|-
|discriminated||align="right"|1628||
|-
|biassing||align="right"|1628||
|-
|enslaved||align="right"|1628||
|-
|backwaters||align="right"|1629||
|-
|palindromic||align="right"|1629||
|-
|palindromes||align="right"|1629||
|-
|tussles||align="right"|1629||
|-
|correspondents||align="right"|1630||
|-
|underrates||align="right"|1632||
|-
|underrate||align="right"|1632||
|-
|characterized||align="right"|1633||
|-
|etcher||align="right"|1634||
|-
|labium||align="right"|1634||
|-
|fluctuates||align="right"|1634||
|-
|morocco||align="right"|1634||
|-
|circumnavigated||align="right"|1634||
|-
|Anglican||align="right"|1635||
|-
|graphically||align="right"|1637||
|-
|millenniums||align="right"|1638||
|-
|domesticating||align="right"|1639||
|-
|pharmaceutical||align="right"|1640||
|-
|onus||align="right"|1640||
|-
|feints||align="right"|1644||
|-
|scavenge||align="right"|1644||
|-
|malls||align="right"|1644||
|-
|salaciously||align="right"|1645||
|-
|additional||align="right"|1646||
|-
|nonuser||align="right"|1646||
|-
|predisposing||align="right"|1646||
|-
|temperamentally||align="right"|1646||
|-
|invigorate||align="right"|1646||
|-
|protuberances||align="right"|1646||
|-
|disinclines||align="right"|1647||
|-
|castanet||align="right"|1647||
|-
|piloting||align="right"|1649||
|-
|leniently||align="right"|1652||
|-
|melange||align="right"|1653||
|-
|dialling||align="right"|1653||
|-
|naively||align="right"|1654||
|-
|siesta||align="right"|1655||
|-
|collectives||align="right"|1655||
|-
|quibbles||align="right"|1656||
|-
|dawdler||align="right"|1656||
|-
|cosmologies||align="right"|1656||
|-
|cosmology||align="right"|1656||
|-
|morbid||align="right"|1656||
|-
|inconvenienced||align="right"|1656||
|-
|numerating||align="right"|1657||
|-
|incapacitate||align="right"|1657||
|-
|overwrite||align="right"|1658||
|-
|horrendous||align="right"|1659||
|-
|tableau||align="right"|1660||
|-
|derisively||align="right"|1662||
|-
|disk||align="right"|1664||
|-
|diverging||align="right"|1665||
|-
|rotundity||align="right"|1665||
|-
|cultivators||align="right"|1665||
|-
|maroon||align="right"|1666||
|-
|stunning||align="right"|1667||
|-
|interleave||align="right"|1668||
|-
|globes||align="right"|1668||
|-
|hick||align="right"|1669||
|-
|realty||align="right"|1670||
|-
|belated||align="right"|1670||
|-
|punning||align="right"|1670||
|-
|haphazardly||align="right"|1671||
|-
|wader||align="right"|1673||
|-
|resilient||align="right"|1674||
|-
|auk||align="right"|1674||
|-
|priggish||align="right"|1676||
|-
|bungalow||align="right"|1676||
|-
|masqueraded||align="right"|1677||
|-
|configuring||align="right"|1677||
|-
|masterstroke||align="right"|1679||
|-
|yaws||align="right"|1679||
|-
|ganglions||align="right"|1681||
|-
|kidnaps||align="right"|1682||
|-
|shivery||align="right"|1683||
|-
|whaler||align="right"|1684||
|-
|bewilder||align="right"|1684||
|-
|roughshod||align="right"|1688||
|-
|bluebird||align="right"|1688||
|-
|toothbrushes||align="right"|1690||
|-
|romance||align="right"|1690||
|-
|adeptness||align="right"|1691||
|-
|dowsing||align="right"|1691||
|-
|processioned||align="right"|1691||
|-
|missioned||align="right"|1692||
|-
|vessels||align="right"|1694||
|-
|flabbiness||align="right"|1694||
|-
|penmanship||align="right"|1695||
|-
|Ojibwa||align="right"|1700||
|-
|actualized||align="right"|1701||
|-
|established||align="right"|1702||
|-
|copped||align="right"|1704||
|-
|liability||align="right"|1705||
|-
|sniggers||align="right"|1706||
|-
|dyspeptic||align="right"|1706||
|-
|crunch||align="right"|1706||
|-
|hibiscuses||align="right"|1706||
|-
|stencil||align="right"|1707||
|-
|quadruplet||align="right"|1709||
|-
|primness||align="right"|1709||
|-
|stocks||align="right"|1709||
|-
|leaseholds||align="right"|1710||
|-
|rheumatic||align="right"|1711||
|-
|papilla||align="right"|1713||
|-
|presentiments||align="right"|1714||
|-
|tantrum||align="right"|1714||
|-
|needling||align="right"|1715||
|-
|impersonating||align="right"|1715||
|-
|settees||align="right"|1716||
|-
|hustling||align="right"|1720||
|-
|unassuming||align="right"|1722||
|-
|Houyhnhnm||align="right"|1726||
|-
|knotholes||align="right"|1726||
|-
|Lilliput||align="right"|1726||
|-
|soporifics||align="right"|1727||
|-
|Shinto||align="right"|1727||
|-
|bludgeons||align="right"|1730||
|-
|pillboxes||align="right"|1730||
|-
|pantheistic||align="right"|1732||
|-
|vampires||align="right"|1732||
|-
|palaver||align="right"|1735||
|-
|Stilton||align="right"|1736||
|-
|incriminates||align="right"|1736||
|-
|philanders||align="right"|1737||
|-
|exiled||align="right"|1737||
|-
|coterie||align="right"|1738||
|-
|cantaloupe||align="right"|1739||
|-
|wham||align="right"|1739||
|-
|swipe||align="right"|1739||
|-
|icings||align="right"|1740||
|-
|segueing||align="right"|1740||
|-
|insulates||align="right"|1741||
|-
|flatiron||align="right"|1743||
|-
|uncharacteristic||align="right"|1748||
|-
|cornmeal||align="right"|1749||
|-
|develop||align="right"|1750||
|-
|spindling||align="right"|1750||
|-
|measurements||align="right"|1751||
|-
|pompon||align="right"|1751||
|-
|fanciers||align="right"|1751||
|-
|lumberyard||align="right"|1753||
|-
|riffles||align="right"|1754||
|-
|personification||align="right"|1755||
|-
|mesquites||align="right"|1759||
|-
|maniacs||align="right"|1763||
|-
|pronouncing||align="right"|1764||
|-
|frivolity||align="right"|1764||
|-
|aboriginals||align="right"|1767||
|-
|Afghans||align="right"|1767||
|-
|paws||align="right"|1769||
|-
|mynas||align="right"|1769||
|-
|modernization||align="right"|1770||
|-
|coagulants||align="right"|1770||
|-
|hairpin||align="right"|1771||
|-
|fagged||align="right"|1772||
|-
|Ta||align="right"|1772||
|-
|propertied||align="right"|1772||
|-
|fagging||align="right"|1772||
|-
|pups||align="right"|1773||
|-
|gibbon||align="right"|1774||
|-
|gecko||align="right"|1774||
|-
|passé||align="right"|1775||
|-
|clannish||align="right"|1776||
|-
|gnu||align="right"|1777||
|-
|gasses||align="right"|1779||
|-
|balalaika||align="right"|1780||
|-
|congressman||align="right"|1780||
|-
|fumigate||align="right"|1781||
|-
|varying||align="right"|1781||
|-
|minutiae||align="right"|1782||
|-
|effervesce||align="right"|1784||
|-
|bangle||align="right"|1787||
|-
|letups||align="right"|1787||
|-
|thyroids||align="right"|1787||
|-
|loots||align="right"|1788||
|-
|Hollands||align="right"|1788||
|-
|Dolly||align="right"|1790||
|-
|weakfish||align="right"|1791||
|-
|rutabagas||align="right"|1791||
|-
|equalizer||align="right"|1792||
|-
|steeplechase||align="right"|1793||
|-
|daredevils||align="right"|1794||
|-
|commentated||align="right"|1794||
|-
|embeds||align="right"|1794||
|-
|telegraphy||align="right"|1795||
|-
|soled||align="right"|1795||
|-
|allover||align="right"|1796||
|-
|titanium||align="right"|1796||
|-
|quizzically||align="right"|1797||
|-
|stashes||align="right"|1797||
|-
|kilogram||align="right"|1797||
|-
|belittled||align="right"|1797||
|-
|Mon||align="right"|1798||
|-
|bibliographies||align="right"|1802||
|-
|fezes||align="right"|1803||
|-
|dressmaking||align="right"|1803||
|-
|condoned||align="right"|1805||
|-
|coarsening||align="right"|1805||
|-
|gumbos||align="right"|1805||
|-
|peewee||align="right"|1806||
|-
|lassos||align="right"|1807||
|-
|Pueblos||align="right"|1808||
|-
|blinder||align="right"|1809||
|-
|eddied||align="right"|1810||
|-
|scurrying||align="right"|1810||
|-
|milliliter||align="right"|1810||
|-
|miffed||align="right"|1811||
|-
|quintet||align="right"|1811||
|-
|aluminum||align="right"|1812||
|-
|shawling||align="right"|1812||
|-
|tossup||align="right"|1812||
|-
|opalescent||align="right"|1813||
|-
|vocalic||align="right"|1814||
|-
|Swahili||align="right"|1814||
|-
|nocturnes||align="right"|1814||
|-
|underpaying||align="right"|1817||
|-
|diarist||align="right"|1818||
|-
|intellectualizes||align="right"|1819||
|-
|stethoscope||align="right"|1820||
|-
|bloodstain||align="right"|1820||
|-
|squawk||align="right"|1821||
|-
|suffragist||align="right"|1822||
|-
|caffeine||align="right"|1823||
|-
|flysheet||align="right"|1825||
|-
|augmented||align="right"|1825||
|-
|subway||align="right"|1825||
|-
|crotchety||align="right"|1825||
|-
|pullout||align="right"|1825||
|-
|beadier||align="right"|1826||
|-
|mammal||align="right"|1826||
|-
|chaffed||align="right"|1827||
|-
|clinics||align="right"|1827||
|-
|recruitment||align="right"|1828||
|-
|mas||align="right"|1829||
|-
|mesmerizing||align="right"|1829||
|-
|constitutionals||align="right"|1829||
|-
|cahoots||align="right"|1829||
|-
|homeopathic||align="right"|1830||
|-
|pterodactyl||align="right"|1830||
|-
|cadres||align="right"|1830||
|-
|hex||align="right"|1830||
|-
|chipmunks||align="right"|1832||
|-
|Horus||align="right"|1832||
|-
|toothpastes||align="right"|1832||
|-
|cottonmouths||align="right"|1832||
|-
|underplays||align="right"|1833||
|-
|dorsals||align="right"|1834||
|-
|cetaceans||align="right"|1835||
|-
|wholeheartedly||align="right"|1836||
|-
|creepily||align="right"|1836||
|-
|étude||align="right"|1837||
|-
|Confucianism||align="right"|1837||
|-
|scatting||align="right"|1838||
|-
|smokestacks||align="right"|1838||
|-
|pretzel||align="right"|1838||
|-
|upheaval||align="right"|1838||
|-
|Bunker||align="right"|1839||
|-
|mushier||align="right"|1839||
|-
|bushings||align="right"|1839||
|-
|OK||align="right"|1839||
|-
|mesa||align="right"|1840||
|-
|wastrel||align="right"|1841||
|-
|pyromaniac||align="right"|1842||
|-
|Assam||align="right"|1842||
|-
|Spitz||align="right"|1842||
|-
|wisteria||align="right"|1842||
|-
|cubbyhole||align="right"|1842||
|-
|kinkiest||align="right"|1844||
|-
|Limoges||align="right"|1844||
|-
|taillights||align="right"|1844||
|-
|subgroups||align="right"|1845||
|-
|garnisheeing||align="right"|1846||
|-
|Joe||align="right"|1846||
|-
|tobogganed||align="right"|1846||
|-
|snobby||align="right"|1846||
|-
|strapless||align="right"|1846||
|-
|cheekily||align="right"|1846||
|-
|orgiastic||align="right"|1846||
|-
|funnest||align="right"|1846||
|-
|tactlessness||align="right"|1847||
|-
|tailcoats||align="right"|1847||
|-
|gynecologists||align="right"|1847||
|-
|cartography||align="right"|1847||
|-
|tenderfeet||align="right"|1849||
|-
|laterals||align="right"|1851||
|-
|educations||align="right"|1851||
|-
|trunks||align="right"|1851||
|-
|hangars||align="right"|1852||
|-
|colloids||align="right"|1852||
|-
|delimits||align="right"|1852||
|-
|delimited||align="right"|1852||
|-
|davenport||align="right"|1853||
|-
|Russians||align="right"|1854||
|-
|abnormality||align="right"|1854||
|-
|rainfall||align="right"|1854||
|-
|Brewer||align="right"|1855||
|-
|hazings||align="right"|1855||
|-
|vendetta||align="right"|1855||
|-
|pullouts||align="right"|1855||
|-
|warlords||align="right"|1856||
|-
|seismographs||align="right"|1858||
|-
|interbreeding||align="right"|1859||
|-
|emulsification||align="right"|1859||
|-
|pub||align="right"|1859||
|-
|soulfulness||align="right"|1860||
|-
|Darwinian||align="right"|1860||
|-
|flautist||align="right"|1860||
|-
|pipelines||align="right"|1860||
|-
|ewe||align="right"|1861||
|-
|bellboy||align="right"|1861||
|-
|trapezes||align="right"|1861||
|-
|ewes||align="right"|1861||
|-
|railroading||align="right"|1862||
|-
|isomorphic||align="right"|1862||
|-
|canapé||align="right"|1863||
|-
|columns||align="right"|1863||
|-
|octets||align="right"|1864||
|-
|coffeecakes||align="right"|1865||
|-
|goulash||align="right"|1866||
|-
|sudsier||align="right"|1866||
|-
|maverick||align="right"|1867||
|-
|safaris||align="right"|1868||
|-
|rangier||align="right"|1868||
|-
|mailbox||align="right"|1868||
|-
|rotting||align="right"|1870||
|-
|saprophyte||align="right"|1870||
|-
|agenda||align="right"|1871||
|-
|roomers||align="right"|1871||
|-
|masterminds||align="right"|1872||
|-
|deforest||align="right"|1874||
|-
|spaghetti||align="right"|1874||
|-
|intercollegiate||align="right"|1874||
|-
|Helicon||align="right"|1875||
|-
|dermatitis||align="right"|1876||
|-
|semiprivate||align="right"|1876||
|-
|toniest||align="right"|1877||
|-
|supplies||align="right"|1878||
|-
|quirking||align="right"|1878||
|-
|wagged||align="right"|1879||
|-
|onionskin||align="right"|1879||
|-
|bacillus||align="right"|1879||
|-
|clobber||align="right"|1879||
|-
|steamrollered||align="right"|1879||
|-
|alumna||align="right"|1879||
|-
|locoweed||align="right"|1879||
|-
|toeholds||align="right"|1880||
|-
|paternalism||align="right"|1881||
|-
|adrenals||align="right"|1882||
|-
|syndicating||align="right"|1882||
|-
|winery||align="right"|1882||
|-
|interface||align="right"|1882||
|-
|infantryman||align="right"|1883||
|-
|worldlier||align="right"|1883||
|-
|shyest||align="right"|1884||
|-
|showdowns||align="right"|1884||
|-
|oilfield||align="right"|1884||
|-
|words||align="right"|1884||
|-
|fixating||align="right"|1885||
|-
|micron||align="right"|1885||
|-
|stagehand||align="right"|1885||
|-
|contraceptives||align="right"|1886||
|-
|sensitization||align="right"|1887||
|-
|parachutists||align="right"|1888||
|-
|sandblaster||align="right"|1888||
|-
|erogenous||align="right"|1889||
|-
|lactating||align="right"|1889||
|-
|psychopathics||align="right"|1890||
|-
|reactor||align="right"|1890||
|-
|unsnaps||align="right"|1892||
|-
|decolletes||align="right"|1894||
|-
|inbound||align="right"|1894||
|-
|marihuana||align="right"|1894||
|-
|encapsulated||align="right"|1894||
|-
|erythrocytes||align="right"|1894||
|-
|sequinned||align="right"|1894||
|-
|defrosted||align="right"|1895||
|-
|sacks||align="right"|1895||
|-
|phonemes||align="right"|1896||
|-
|mescaline||align="right"|1896||
|-
|ions||align="right"|1896||
|-
|midyear||align="right"|1896||
|-
|redwoods||align="right"|1897||
|-
|happenstances||align="right"|1897||
|-
|sandhog||align="right"|1897||
|-
|eggs||align="right"|1898||
|-
|taxicab||align="right"|1899||
|-
|concoction||align="right"|1675||
|}
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:49, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

: I identified several dozen words as possibly conservative. But the problem here is that a general sample does not catch enough real conservative words. Still, you might assess the centuries of my selections (I didn't look at any dates before making these selections) and we can go from there.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:36, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

::Thank you for your work! I now added the dates of the words, as found automatically at the Merriam-Webster. Here a first table:
{|class="wikitable"
!
!16s
!17s
!18s
!Σ
|-
!conservative words
|15||9||17||41
|-
!all words
|176||114||210||500
|-
!percentage of conservative words
|8.52%||7.89%||8.1%||8.2%
|}

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 11:29, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

::: That's a fascinating analysis, but its meaning is simply this: roughly 8% of all new words are conservative in nature. That is greater than the number of words I would have identified as liberal in nature.

::: But very few of these words qualified for our list, which expressly consists of the "''best''" new conservative words. Those words are being generated at a geometric rate.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:55, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

== Destruction of words ==

Andy, your model takes into account only the ''creation'' of new words. But in any living language, words fall out of use, too.

Imagine a country where a constant number of ''conservative words'' is created each year, but where these words have a half-time of 100 years, that is, e.g, only half of the words used in 1600 were still in use in 1700.

Such a country would have the same distribution of conservative words as [[Conservapedia's Law]] implies - but the overall number of conservative words becomes constant after a while...

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 10:02, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

: The conservative words are remarkably durable and long-lasting, while the liberal terms (like "population control") fall out of favor quite quickly.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:17, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

== PERFECTION: 20-40-80-160 BY CENTURY ==

For my statistical analysis, I recounted the words in the table: in fact, the
numbers in the small table of the words per century doesn't match the list of
the conservative words:

{|class="wikitable"
!century
!17th
!18th
!19th
!20th
!21st
|-
!claimed
|20||40||80||160||13
|-
!recount
|20||40||81||150||14
|}

An examination of the page's history showed that on Oct 31, 2009 this error was
introduced (with ''Segway'') - and preserved ever since.

{|class="wikitable"
!century
!17th
!18th
!19th
!20th
!21st
|-
!pre Segway
|14||28||56||112||6
|-
!post Segway
|15||28||56||124||6
|-
!my count
|15||29||57||114||6
|}

How does this confirm that ''selection bias'' is the driving force behind the [[Conservapedia's law]]? Well (ignoring the 21st century for a while), if this law holds then ~53% of the words you find should be from the 20th century, ~47% from the three earlier centuries.

But in the time from Oct 31, 2009 until Apr , 2010 when you claimed ''17-34-70-141 by century - spectacular, near-perfect geometric growth continues'', you found only 17 words from the last century, and 22 older words, that is, instead of 53% / 47% the odds of 44% / 56% !

After reaching this mile stone, your ratio rebounded...

So, you always reached your goal, though this was an arbitrary one, set by a typo. This implies that you are actively targeting a ratio, and that this ratio is independent of a actual distribution of the conservative words.

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 11:16, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

: Typos and counting errors are, of course, inevitable; your own comment above has an error in its last seven words. Errors can be found in the greatest of works, such as [[Bernard Riemann]]'s famous mathematical lecture. None of this undermines the value of Riemann's work ... or ours. The best new conservative words do double by century, and it would be nearly impossible to identify such a large number closely fitting that pattern unless the underlying pattern existed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:06, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

You are right: It´s not about typos - it's about the phenomenon I'll explain in the following section
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 10:46, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

== Too Good to be True ==

Imagine the hypothesis: There are as many male writers as there are female
ones.

To proof this hypothesis, round for round, a player '''A''' names a male author,
then a player '''B''' a female one. The round one player runs out of names - and
the other doesn't- the hypothesis is falsified. If both stop in the same round,
the hypothesis is true.

But what can be said about the validity of the hypothesis before this last
round? There are thousands and thousands of authors, what do we know when we
reach round 300?

Nothing. At least nothing about the ratio of female and male authors! In fact,
imagine the game with player '''A''' naming ''two'' male authors for each of
player '''B''''s female writer. After 300 rounds, this game is far from being
finished, but we can't conclude anything!

Unless this game is played to its end, it's just an exercise in futility.

Statistics try to find methods which allow to draw conclusions without exhausting the whole population1

So, what's another way to create data for validating or falsifying the
hypothesis? Let's think of player '''S''' who says that he will gather authors
at random - and that this list will beautifully exemplify the hypothesis.

And so it does: he gives a couple of hundred names and - lo and behold - exactly
half of them are males! He even goes a step further and says that each two
consecutive name would mirror the hypothesis.

When would you start to suspect that he is not an honest player? The probability
that a pair of authors consists from a man and a woman is 1/2. And in a random
list of names, you'll find many such pairs. But if '''S''' announces: the next
pair is gender-mixed, the one thereafter, too, and the next one, again - that's
like predicting three ''heads'' when tossing a coin three times. If he does it
ten times, you would be a fool not to think that something fishy is happening,
i.e., that the names are not taken from a random list of authors, but in fact
are chosen deliberately. His data is just ''too good to be true''!

Such a list has no more significance than the first couple of hundred names
generated by our players '''A''' and '''B'''.

Andy, I hope you see how this scenario applies to your method of generating
''best conservative new words''.

At least four times you announced the start of a new ''layer'', and each time,
you were able to complete it perfectly. Though the probability to find the
combination 1-2-4-8 for 15 words may be bigger than for each other combination,
it's at best 2.6508% . Doing this four times in a row yields odds of
1:2,000,000.

Again, your findings are just ''too good to be true'', therefore, they are not
believable, and don't support your claims made in [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law]].

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 10:46, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

: Disbelief of something because it is "too good to be true" is not a strong argument against it. Perhaps it is not precisely true as stated, but is a rough approximation, for example. Your specific arguments against the proposition above don't withstand scrutiny.

: Finding the best new conservative words is like drilling for oil. Of course it is not a random process. That would be silly. But the lack of randomness does not mean that no intelligent conclusions can be drawn. We can properly conclude that there is more oil in the Arabian Peninsula than in Pennsylvania, where oil was first discovered, despite the lack of randomness in drilling oil wells. Our conclusion would be based on the difference in output, and the implausibility that ''any'' reasonable selection technique would produce such a differential if there were not also an underlying difference.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:06, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

== A summary with graphs... ==

On June 9, 2009, Andrew Schlafly proclaimed his [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law]]: <blockquote>'''Conservapedia's Law''' ''is the observation that conservative insights increase over time at a geometric rate, as in 1-2-4-8-16-etc. 
''For example, there is a doubling in effective new conservative terms per century. </blockquote> This remarkable precise observation was bolstered over the time by a list of 300 ''conservative words''
<blockquote>''Powerful, insightful new conservative terms have grown at a geometric rate, roughly doubling every century. For every insightful new conservative term originating in the 1600s, there are two new terms originating in the 1700s, four new terms in the 1800s, and eight new terms in the 1900s, for a pattern of "1-2-4-8". This implies a more conservative future and a correlation between conservatism and truth. The year 1612 is our starting point: the King James Version of the Bible was published in 1611, and William Shakespeare had written nearly all his plays. ''</blockquote>

{|
|The pic on the right shows the percentage of terms per century in which they were first mentioned.
|[[File:Bcw-001.png|thumb|Best Conservative New Words]]
|-
|The distribution of these ''conservative words'' is even more remarkable as it doesn't reflect the general trends of creating new words. To exemplify this, I took a sample of ≈ 42,000 words from the word-book of my ubuntu-distribution and checked their creation date with the Merriam-Webster (the gray areas of the two diagrams overlap)
|[[File:Bcw-002.png|thumb|distribution of 42,000 words]]
|-
|To convince Andy Schlafly's that the distribution of the words in his list is just an artifact generated by [[sample bias]], I at first showed that it doesn't hold for shorter periods of time than centuries. But Andy Schlafly told me that he didn't see ''any merit'' in my challenge: ''The entry observes that new terms are generated at higher rates during productive periods within decades, for example just after or during religious awakenings.''
|[[File:Bcw-003.png|thumb|Cons. Words per Decade]]
|-
|Interestingly, I couldn't observe any effect of the ''Great Religious Awakenings'', neither in the number of ''conservative words'' nor in the number of all words.
|[[Image:Bcw-004.png|thumb|All Words per Decade]]
|}
No methodology is given how the ''conservative words'' are detected and gathered. To put the whole thing on a sounder ground, I asked Andrew Schlafly to take an unbiased text: I gave him a list of 500 words, which were - according to the [[Merriam Webster]] - first mentioned between 1600 and 1999. Andrew Schlafly objected to this sample as newer words are not well represented in word-books. When I propelled a second sample, consisting of 500 words all originated between 1600 and 1899 (300 years should be enough to prove his law), he was willing to mark the words he things to be conservative.

I'm very grateful that Andrew Schlafly took part in my little experiment: Thank you!

{|
|The five hundred words were taken at random from the suitable subset of the 42,000 words which I had dated, and so the sample distribution matches the overall distribution
|[[File:Bcw-005.png|thumb|500 Words per Centuries]]
|-
|Andrew Schlafly identified 41 words (8.2%) as conservative. The distribution of these 41 words over the centuries does not show a geometric progression.
|[[Image:Bcw-006.png|thumb|Identified as Conservative]]
|-
|In fact, their distribution mirrors the distribution of the whole sample, as each century ≈ 8% of the words are identified as ''conservative''
|[[File:Bcw-007.png|thumb|Percentages]]
|-
|This linearly dependence can be found for shorter periods of time (here for steps of 20 years) - and is found to be statistically significant.
|[[File:Bcw-008.png|thumb|Periods of 20 years]]
|-
|A striking contrast to this is the absence of any connection between Andrew Schlafly's list of over 300 conservative words, and a general distribution of the creation of words.
|[[File:Bcw-009.png|thumb|Periods of 20 years]]
|-
|However, if one maps the percentage of words in - e.g. - a 20 years' period in the corresponding century (24% of all 20th-century word are from the 1900s, 18% from the 1920s, 26% from the 1940s, and so forth...), one finds again a positive correlation.
|[[File:Bcw-010.png|thumb|percentages over 20 years]]
|}

Andrew Schlafly explains the discrepancies as follows:<blockquote>That's a
fascinating analysis, but its meaning is simply this: roughly 8% of all new
words are conservative in nature. That is greater than the number of words I
would have identified as liberal in nature. But very few of these words
qualified for our list, which expressly consists of the "best" new conservative
words. Those words are being generated at a geometric rate.--Andy Schlafly
11:55, 28 July 2010 (EDT) </blockquote>

I've to take exception to this: Andrew Schlafly has shown that he is able to
generate candidates for his list for any time period as it is needed to fit his
prediction. He could as easily make a list following a 1-3-9-27 (or 2-3-5-7-11)
pattern.

Even a claim like: ''the number of Best New Conservative Words'' is not corroborated in any way by the list of the [[Essay:Best New Conservative Words]], and the geometric progressions seems to be just the approximation of a phantasy.

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 13:23, 3 August 2010 (EDT)

:Ron, your quantity of commentary is impressive and your graphs (the ones that show up) are informative. But quantity is no substitute or quality. You never addressed my point above about how finding the ''best'' conservative words is like drilling for oil. Even if the same percentage of drills in Pennsylvania struck oil as in the Arabian Peninsula, that would not mean that both regions are equal for drilling for oil. Much better wells can be found in the Arabian Peninsula, and that's what this analysis is all about. Those good Arabian wells cannot be found in Pennsylvania, even though oil was first discovered there.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:04, 3 August 2010 (EDT)

::*''Ron, your quantity of commentary is impressive and your graphs (the ones that show up) are informative.'' Thanks. BTW, all the graphs are in Conservapedia's database - you can get directly to the missing two [http://conservapedia.com/images/d/d1/Bcw-003.png bcw-003.png] and [http://conservapedia.com/images/a/a0/Bcw-004.png bcw-004.png]. It seems that the thumbs and the previews weren't produced correctly - maybe a glitch in your software to which you want attend?
::*''But quantity is no substitute or quality.'' You mad a couple of quantifiable claims (''1-2-4-8 pattern''), so a quantitative analysis is what you get. You may rest assured that the quality of my information is good, too, and the math behind the analysis is sound: It's just basic statistics done with R.
::*''You never addressed my point above about how finding the best conservative words is like drilling for oil. '' As far as metaphors go, this isn't such a bad one: Imagine four oil fields. If you put one, two, four and eight wells on them, you get oil out of them according to your geometric progression. This works as long as there is enough oils in the fields, but you can say something about the amount of oil in the fields at first when they start getting dry. The English language is very rich, it seems that 8% of its words are conservative, so there should be an abundance even of ''best conservative words''. Until you have sucked a century dry, you cannot say anything about the distribution of the ''best conservative words''.

::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 08:14, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

One way of marrying the two ideas above (that there is no increase of conservative terms over time and that there is an increase in the "best" conservative terms over time) is simply to suggest that conservative terms are getting better in quality and not quantity, which is the point that Mr. Schlafly makes, I believe. An explanation that might want to be considered is that after a new term is coined, it may slowly lose its relevence over time. I would suggest that if you look at the vocabulary from the 17th century, many words have lost their relevence greatly. This presumably applies to conservative terms as well. So, a partial explanation for conservative terms increasing in "quality" over time may be the decrease in time-lag and thus an increase in relevence.--[[User:GrahamB|GrahamB]] 12:15, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

== Decrypt ==

Can I challenge 'decrypt' as a conservative word? Take the greatest decryption exercise in history, the breaking of the German Enigma code in World War 2 by British and Polish cryptographers. Alan Turing, who made the crucial breakthrough, was homosexual. Several others involved may have been communist sympathisers. The great majority were recruited from either the civil service (= Big Government) or universities (= Professor Values) and returned to those professions when WW2 was over. Bottom line: not a very conservative bunch. (Check [http://www.bletchleypark.org.uk the Bletchley Park website].) [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 18:05, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

: Beware of [[liberal]] revisionism, where historians try to give credit to liberals for achievements no matter how unjustified. It was Polish mathematicians who decrypted the enigma, not an Englishman. The British are notoriously weak in mathematics.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:11, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

:: Andy, you don't seem to know so much about the decoding of Enigma. I gave you the reference to the Bletchley Park website so you can read about it there. The main contributions from the Poles were (1) stealing a German Enigma machine, (2) working out how Enigma encoded messages, (3) getting the Enigma machine to the Brits and (4) proposing a method for automated decoding of ciphers (the "Bombe"). The bombes that were eventually built were constructed by British engineers and used some principles but not the details of the Polish mathematicians' idea. Pretty much everything else was done by the British, including the first decipherment of Enigma, the second decipherment when the German Navy introduced a more sophisticated code, and the building of Colussus, the world's first programmable electronic computer, which played an essential role in decoding the later, more complex Enigma codes used by the U-boat fleet. Turing's role was crucial (that ain't liberal revisionism - go on, read about it). Some Poles who'd escaped to England did indeed work with the British but it just ain't true that they decoded Enigma.
:: As for "the British are notoriously weak in math": you're having a laugh, as my British colleagues would say. [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 19:47, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

::: Benjy, British liberals famously support and credit each other, often undeservedly so. If you find a great British mathematician who ranks with the best in the world, please do tell us who he is!

::: As to decoding the Enigma, perhaps the Brits did some machinery to help, but the mathematicians who provided the brainpower were Poles.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:14, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

:::: Sir Isaac Newton was a British liberal (he was a non-standard Christian that wrote extensively on the occult) who was the first to scientifically describe gravity and his 1687 publication ''Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica'' is considered the seminal work in classical mechanics. The top physicists in the world consider Newton one of the two greatest physicists in history, and his name is still used in science today, for example, "a non-Newtonian fluid". He may also have been homosexual, conisdering he was largely sexless in an age where homosexuality could get you burned at the stake. [[User:JohnQP|JohnQP]] 21:44, 5 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::Brilliant logic. 17th century tabloids tell us little of the women in Newton's life, therefore, there must not have been any. As for his writings on the occult, perhaps your referring to his beliefs that some tales in Ovid's Metamorpheses were inspired by physical fact? If I recall, he was proved right in this regard, when he demonstrated that the chemicals which corresponding to classical elements ascribed to certain mythological figures actually, in one case, produced a cracking purple "web-like" effect when combined - just as in Ovid's story. I'd hardly call this un-Christian, especially since he also used translating the Bible as inspiration for much of his work. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]][[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]] 21:50, 5 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::I must agree with you, JacobB. This is nothing other than rank liberal revisionism of the highest order. Slandering the good name of such a noble Christian is just plainly offensive. --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 21:54, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

''" If you find a great British mathematician who ranks with the best in the world, please do tell us who he is!"'' - Here is a small list of some whom I would consider to rank with the world's best (in no particular order):
* Sir Isaac Newton
* Charles Babbage
* Alan Turing
* G.H. Hardy
* Bertrand Russell
* Roger Penrose
* Andrew Wiles
* Arthur Cayley
* William Rowan Hamilton
* George Boole
* Augustus De Morgan
Whilst I agree that Polish mathematicians played an important role in cracking the Enigma code, but to jump from that to saying that not only are there no great British mathematicians, but that also Brits are 'notoriously weak' at maths - is clearly unfair and incorrect. [[User:FionaN|FionaN]] 07:40, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

: While I am respectful of the contributions of those on your list, as a group they are a far cry from the greatest mathematicians and many would not be considered "British". Hamilton was Irish, for example, and Newton was pre-modern and pre-Britain. Wiles did his work in the U.S. Russell's work was deflated by Godel, and others on the list don't even come close to being great mathematicians.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:21, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

:: Fiona seems to miss the varying degrees of "mathematician", "great mathematician", and "one of the greatest mathematicians" as if they're all the same thing. We saw the same thing when another contributor was unable to grasp the difference between "conservative words" and "best conservative words". It's as if liberals can see everything in the world only in black and white terms, as if everything falls perfectly into one of two categories, e.g. "mathematician" and "not-mathematician". I think this is another example of [[Liberal Inability To Abstract]]. [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 14:42, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

Andy, you stated: "It was Polish mathematicians who decrypted the enigma, not an Englishman" and "The British are notoriously weak in mathematics". Both these statements are not only untrue but ridiculous. I've tried to contribute to this encyclopedia but I'm not going to waste my time messing around if you fill it up with your own uninformed prejudices, refuse to do some easy reading to check your facts, and get absurdly defensive when your statements are corrected by people who are more knowledgeable on the subject in question. ''Laziness is not a conservative character trait, least of all intellectual laziness.'' Please tell me if you're going to check your facts before shooting your mouth off in future, in which case I'd be pleased to continue contributing to CP. [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 15:40, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

: Benjy, please rant somewhere else instead. We tell the truth here, whether [[Anglophile]]s accept it or not. The relative weakness of [[Britain]] in mathematics is an objective fact.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:44, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::Have you any proof for your assertion? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 16:37, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::(EC) Hi Andy. Are you talking about mathematical ability in the general UK population, or about the number of major contributions to the field by British mathematicians? Thanks, --[[User:JoanZ|JoanZ]] 16:48, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

:::(EC) Look at any list of the greatest mathematicians of the past 200 and count how many were from Britain. Or list the greatest modern mathematical achievements and count how many came out of Britain. I'm sorry liberals don't teach this, and that's why there is a need for Conservapedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:50, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::::According to [http://fabpedigree.com/james/mathmen.htm this blog], 9 of 99 were British - and that's an all time, Ancient Greece to present list. Now you; would you care to support your position with sources? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:05, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::And ''your source'' comes from a ''blog?'' How about you, SamI, come up with non-blog, official sources yourself to support ''your'' position. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:16, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::Rather a blog than my own imagination. Would Andy care to provide his sources? The burden of proof, and all that. [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:21, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::(EC)[http://www.sci.hkbu.edu.hk/scilab/math/math.html This list gives 3 British and 1 Irish out of 14.] And why do I keep having to fill out captcha boxes? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:25, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::Andy said "Look at '''any''' list" (my emphasis). This is a list already on the Internet so SamI is just following Andy's advice. Please note that there are '''no''' people on that list who were born in the U.S.A. [[User:GeoffA|GeoffA]] 17:23, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::Guess what...you, SamI, just accused Andy of using his own imagination, and since you, GeoffA, is supportive of Sam's statement, both of you are going to get official sources to support your side, otherwise I'm going to assume you are using your own imaginations just to troll here. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:31, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::::I would say that the second source I posted above is fairly official. And why do we need to support our side, but Andy doesn't have to support his beyond saying 'oh, it's an objective fact'? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:39, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::How about the [[Fields Medal]] as a rough proxy? I count six awarded to UK mathematicians out of a total of 48 (12.5%), compared to thirteen awarded to Americans (~27%). Not bad for a small island. --[[User:JoanZ|JoanZ]] 17:27, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::::: Well there you go "Karajou". Since the USA has a population ~5 times larger than the UK, it looks like the UK is doing pretty well. And don't you think Andy can talk for himself without you leaping to his side? What are '''your''' sources to support his statement? [[User:GeoffA|GeoffA]] 17:36, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::There are better ways to prove us wrong then by coming here and making demands; one of those ways is to provide a reasonable explanation which supports your position, backed up by valid sources, and being polite about the whole thing. See ya in a couple hours. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:44, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

(outdent) Well I used the two "ours" you gave me to find some sources.

How about this [http://www.virtualimage.co.uk/html/great_mathematicians.html commercial source]? Of the 20 mathematiciams, John Napier, Ada Lovelace, Lewis Carroll, Alan Turing and William Oughtred are British. That's 25%. No Americans.

Or how about [http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2010/apr/11/the-10-best-mathematicians this] article listing a top 10? 1 Brit - no Americans.

The Scientific Computing Laboratory at Hong Kong Baptist University [http://www.sci.hkbu.edu.hk/scilab/math/math.html lists] four Brits out of 14. Yes - Christains disagree with you too.

Another blog (I know you don't like them, but surely the "Best of the Public" is always right? Your boss thinks so) [http://kaushal42.blogspot.com/2008/01/twenty-five-greatest-mathematicians-of.html here] has two Brits out of 25. No Americans.

Centre College [http://web.centre.edu/mat/century.html lists] 24 for last century alone. Four Brits and Five Yanks. That's still not bad for such a poor, small, atheistic island.

Lastly, in the magazine Mathematics Teacher (I.7. Vol.55, 1962), W.C. Eells [http://afrodita.rcub.bg.ac.rs/~flora/100.html published] a list of the 100 greatest mathematicians of all time. I'm not going to go through all 100, but Newton, Napier, Wallis, Hamilton, Barrow, Taylor, Briggs, Babbage, Smith, H.J.S., Cotes, Boole, Halley and Lord Kelvin were all Brits. That's 13/100.

So. There are your sources. I note that SamI can't respond because TK blocked him/her. Since I fully expect the same fate to befall me after this post for having proved you wrong, I'll say goodbye now. I suppose it's unrealistic to expect you or Andy to provide sources to back up ''your'' point of view. [[User:GeoffA|GeoffA]] 19:43, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:Granted, GeoffA, I would agree with your point that we should provide sources to back up our point of view. But we're not going to do it for someone on demand. And there lies the end of the lesson. Hope you learned something about tact. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 21:05, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

*Is there something in the water over there in the U.K., or is it your atheism? Perhaps its the generally gloomy economic picture and remnants of the class system that make you as you are! Godspeed to all of you. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 17:38, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

Brits, we're talking about '''''mathematicians''''' in this thread. Do you know what a mathematician is? That's not a physicist (Penrose), a computer geek (Lovelace, Babbage, Turing), or a political hack (Russell). One more tip: the Irish (Hamilton) do not consider themselves to be British.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:25, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

*''Newton was pre-modern and pre-Britain'': The [[Oxford calculators]] were pre-modern, but English. [[John Napier]] or [[Richard Recorde]] where Scottish or Welsh - though they weren't English, they were inhabitants of the British Isles, and therefore British in the same sense as most Haitians are Hispaniolians as well. Both are modern mathematicians - in the usual sense of the word ''"modern"'' when talking about periods of history. You may describe them as ''early modern''. Sir Isaac Newton - who lived even later - was e a modern mathematician, too. And as a subject of Queen Anne of Great Britain, he was most certainly British.
*''Do you know what a mathematician is? '' A mathematician is someone who contributes to the field of mathematics. Mathematicians are not squeamish: you could be covered with green fur and be a baker - if you solve an open Hilbert problem, they will you love you, and count you as a mathematician. Penrose, Lovelace, Babbage, Turing and Russell were great mathematicians, even if they were part-time physicists, geeks or hacks. {{unsigned|RonLar}}

:: Additionally, the overlap between mathematics and physics is huge - especially applied mathematics. Sophie Germain, a ''woman'' mathematician who appears on several of those lists, contributed a huge amount of work to the subject of elastics, and her work was used extensively, for instance in the construction of the Eiffel Tower. She is universally considered to be a mathematician, but you would apparently describe her as a physicist or even an architect. Russell was deeply involved in the Hilbert Program, which though ultimately unsuccessful provided modern mathematics with a solid framework. His work ''Principia Mathematica'' is one of the most important works on the subject.

:: I cannot understand why you have such a closed mind on this subject. You have plenty of evidence that contradicts your opinion, so it's now only fair that you present evidence to support your hypothesis or at least consider revising it.

:: Please note, that I am not claiming that Britain is the pre-eminent country for producing mathematicians. Germany would probably win that prize across modern history, and if you take the last 50 years or so, it's probably the U.S.A. (although I have no hard evidence for that statement). I merely take issue with your statement that "The British are notoriously weak in mathematics". [[User:GeoffA|GeoffA]] 08:43, 7 August 2010 (EDT)

== General reply to Brits, if any, who commented above ==

The [[Brits]] who protest so stridently illustrate to me the problem of [[Anglophilia]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:22, 7 August 2010 (EDT)

:"curiouser and curiouser" - for me, it looks as the [[Anglophobe]]s are justignoring the evidence:

:{|class="wikitable"
!colspan="3"|Field Medalists by Country
|-
!country
!#
!medalist
|-
!USA
|align="right"|13 ||Jesse Douglas, John Milnor, Paul Joseph Cohen, Stephen Smale, John G. Thompson, Charles Fefferman, Daniel Quillen, William Thurston, Shing-Tung Yau, Michael Freedman, Edward Witten, Curtis T. McMullen, David Mumford
|-
!France
|align="right"|9||Laurent Schwartz, Jean-Pierre Serre, René Thom, Alexander Grothendieck, Alain Connes, Pierre-Louis Lions, Jean-Christophe Yoccoz, Laurent Lafforgue, Wendelin Werner
|-
!Soviet Union/Russia
|align="right"|8||Sergei Novikov, Grigory Margulis, Vladimir Drinfel'd, Efim Zelmanov, Maxim Kontsevich, Vladimir Voevodsky, Andrei Okounkov, (Grigori Perelman)
|-
!UK
|align="right"|6||Klaus Roth, Michael Atiyah, Alan Baker, Simon Donaldson, Richard Borcherds, Timothy Gowers
|-
!Japan
|align="right"|3||Kunihiko Kodaira, Heisuke Hironaka, Shigefumi Mori
|-
!Belgium
|align="right"|2||Pierre Deligne, Jean Bourgain
|-
!Finland
|align="right"|1||Lars Ahlfors
|-
!Norway
|align="right"|1||Atle Selberg
|-
!Sweden
|align="right"|1||Lars Hörmander
|-
!Italy
|align="right"|1||Enrico Bombieri
|-
!Germany
|align="right"|1||Gerd Faltings
|-
!New Zealand
|align="right"|1||Vaughan F. R. Jones
|-
!Australia
|align="right"|1||Terence Tao
|}

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 15:04, 9 August 2010 (EDT)

:Klaus Roth was Prussian. Michael Atiyah is Sudanese/Egyptian. Simon Donaldson does his work in ''four-dimensions'' when this world obviously only has ''three''. I imagine if I made up the math as I went, I could get a Fields medal as well? And Richard Borcherds is from South Africa.
:So spectacularly, you provide ''maybe'' two candidates for British mathematicians. Hardly impressive, considering ''Finland'' managed to get one. And who cares about this "Field's Medal" anyways? It's just some award experts give to each other to make each other feel better, and exclude the best of the public. --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 20:07, 9 August 2010 (EDT)
::For the record, "Cathy," the cobordism work of Donaldson was not only essential to the classification theorems which have revolutionized modern topology, but also have important applications in quantum mechanics and other fields that deal with "this world." For somebody who apparently has such extensive knowledge in the history of 20th century mathematics, you are certainly lacking in understanding if you believe Donaldson "made up the math as he went." As for the Fields medal (no apostrophe) being something that the best of the public are excluded from, you should be aware that best of the public exemplar Gregori Perelman was OFFERED a Fields medal and turned it down.
::Before you continue your pattern of jumping into talk page arguments with on-the-spot research, I suggest you make significant and substantive edits to our mainspace articles.[[User:JacobB|JacobB]][[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]] 20:38, 9 August 2010 (EDT)

== Connive is too early ==

With an origin date of 1601, "connive" is too early, I think. We start at 1612, after publication of the [[KJV]] and completion of nearly all of [[Shakespeare]]'s works. But "connive" is a fascination suggestion.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:42, 24 August 2010 (EDT)
:I was debating to put it in the Conservative Downgraded terms.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 00:56, 24 August 2010 (EDT)

::That would work! It's always good to preserve information for everyone's benefit.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:57, 24 August 2010 (EDT)

Essay:Best New Conservative Words

2010-08-22T00:20:38Z

ChrisGT90: /* Conservative words and terms */

[[Image:Tax-spend.jpg|thumb|480px|The "tax-and-spend" slogan stuck to Harry Hopkins like a well-fitted suit.]]Each year the English language develops about a thousand new words. The [[King James Version]] of the [[Bible]] contains only about 8,000 different words,<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8013859.stm</ref> and many good words have developed since then.

[[Conservative]] terms, which express [[conservative insights]], are being generated at a faster rate, and with much higher quality, than [[liberal]] terms are. This implies an inevitable conservative triumph over liberalism.

Powerful, insightful new conservative terms have grown at a [[geometric progression|geometric rate]], roughly doubling every century. For every insightful new conservative term originating in the 1600s, there are two new terms originating in the 1700s, four new terms in the 1800s, and eight new terms in the 1900s, for a pattern of "1-2-4-8". This implies a more conservative future and a correlation between conservatism and truth. The year 1612 is our starting point: the King James Version of the Bible was published in 1611, and [[William Shakespeare]] had written nearly all his plays.

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Century
!# New Conservative Terms
!Most Prolific Periods
|-
|1600s
|20
|period following publication of [[KJV]]
|-
|1700s
|40
|[[Great Awakening|Great Awaken.]], [[American Revolution|Am. Revol.]], [[Constitutional Convention|Const. Conv.]]
|-
|1800s
|80
|1820s - political transition and conflict
|-
|1900s
|161
|1940s - [[World War II|WWII]] and postwar transition
|-
|2000s
|14 (preliminary)
|
|-
|}

==Conservative words and terms==

{{clear}}
{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!New Term
!Origin date
!Comments
|-
|[[accountability]]
|1794
|
|-
|[[action-at-a-distance]]
|1693
|[[Newton]]'s acceptance of this concept -- which became fundamental to [[electrostatics]] and [[quantum mechanics]] and has a basis in Christianity<ref>''See, e.g.'', [[Jesus]]'s cure of the centurion's slave.</ref> -- was central to the development of his theory of gravity.<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/newton-philosophy/#ActDis</ref> Einstein criticized this concept as "spooky".
|-
|activism
|1915
|this differentiates conservatives from inactive people; this term might have originated in connection with [[Prohibition]] and efforts to pass the [[Eighteenth Amendment]]
|-
|aerobics
|1967
|invented by the Christian Dr. Kenneth H. Cooper<ref>http://www.christianadvice.net/famous_christians.htm</ref> to describe his self-help, revolutionary program to improve health, he entitled his ground-breaking book in 1968 ''Aerobics''.
|-
|alarmism
|1867
|needless warnings, as in the politically motivated claims of [[global warming]]
|-
|alcoholism
|1860
|excessive or addictive drinking of alcohol
|-
|algorithm
|1894
|an efficient and consistent step-by-step methodology for achieving a goal, the opposite of [[liberal style]]
|-
|altruism
|1853
|selfless assistance of others; this also occurs in the animal kingdom, and is a [[counterexample to evolution]]
|-
|ambulance chaser
|1896
|a lawyer who searches for victims to persuade them to sue for his profit
|-
|[[American dream]]
|1911<ref>1911 is the date given by the "OED", which refers to the Oxford English Dictionary. The Merriam-Webster dictionary gives a date of 1931.</ref>
|the idea that one’s work should be rewarding.
|-
|American Way
|1930s
|later conservative entrepreneurs used this to coin a new name for what became a highly successful and uniquely American business model: "Amway"
|-
|[[anti-Christian]]
|1900s
|Ten million sites turn up in a Google search, yet the Merriam-Webster dictionary doesn't recognize this important term.
|-
|anticompetitive
|1952
|interfering with open competition and the enormous benefits that flow from it
|-
|antilife
|1929
|critical term describing a tendency to oppose life and lifesaving care
|-
|apple pie
|1780
|honesty, simplicity, wholesomeness. Relating to, or characterized by traditionally American values. <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apple%20pie Merriam-webster- Apple pie]</ref>
|-
|assimilate
|1880s<ref>estimate only; this originated sometime in the late 1880s.</ref>
|the desired absorption of immigrant groups into the culture and mores of the resident population
|-
|attention span
|1934
|correlated with intelligence, the attention span is how long someone can concentrate on something. It is rapidly shortening; the Lincoln-Douglas debates 150 years ago lasted for hours, but none do today.<ref>http://www.help4teachers.com/ras.htm</ref> The average length of sentences in speech is another indication of attention span, and it has been shortening significantly.
|-
|baby boom
|1941
|an increase in birthrate, which is a good thing; note that the baby boom actually started before World War II, contrary to what textbooks teach.
|-
|[[bailout]]
|1951
|wasting taxpayer money to rescue, temporarily, a failing company
|-
|bedrock
|1840-1850
|an American term for unbroken solid rock underneath fragments or soil, which adopted the figurative meaning of strong values: "bedrock principles"<ref>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bedrock</ref>
|-
|beltway mentality
|1986
|popularized by [[Paul Weyrich]] though possibly first used by then-Governor [[John Sununu]] ("captives of yourselves"), it refers to a governing style that sees only as far as the highway that surrounds its capital, especially the one around D.C.
|-
|biased
|1649
|
|-
|Big Brother
|1949
|government constantly watching its citizens; [[George Orwell]] first coined this term in his classic, ''[[1984]]''
|-
|Blame America Crowd<ref>Or "Blame-America-First Crowd"</ref>
|1984
|Michael Barone quoted [[Jeane Kirkpatrick]] as saying that the "San Francisco Democrats" (site of the Democratic National Convention in 1984) "always blame America first."<ref>http://www.creators.com/opinion/michael-barone/the-blame-america-first-crowd.html</ref>
|-
|blank check
|1884
|irresponsibly giving someone unlimited spending authority or power, as in "a Con Con would be a blank check to destroy the nation"
|-
|[[Blue Dog Democrat]]
|1995
|a person who adheres to conservative principles within the Democratic party, once called a Boll Weevil; as of 2009 there are 45-50 Blue Dog Democrats in the [[House of Representatives]], which is enough to form a majority with [[Republicans]]
|-
|boondoggle
|1935
|"popularized during the [[New Deal]] as a contemptuous word for make-work projects for the unemployed." <ref>http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=boondoggle&searchmode=none</ref> The term gained popularity in [[Canada]] following a corruption scandal tied to the [[Liberal]] government in 2000.
|-
|bootstrap
|1913
|unaided effort, personal merit, hard work
|-
|bork
|1988
|coined by William Safire to refer to how Democrats savage a conservative nominee, such as their defeat of Supreme Court nominee [[Robert H. Bork]].
|-
|born-again
|1961
|it takes an open mind and heart
|-
|brainstorm
|1894
|a burst of productive thought
|-
|brainwashing
|1950
|derived from the Chinese term "xǐnǎo" soon after the [[communist]] takeover of China, "brainwashing" means forced abandonment of [[faith]] in favor of regimented [[atheism]]. In a more general sense, it refers to the manipulation and control of the human mind through torture and propaganda techniques.
|-
|brinkmanship
|1956
|the art of displaying a willingness to use military force in order to obtain a just resolution to a conflict between nations
|-
|[[bureaucracy]]
|1818
|
|-
|busywork
|1910
|meaningless activity under the pretense of accomplishing something
|-
|can-do
|1903 <ref> according to the Oxford English Dictionary. [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/can-do Miram-webster] gives the date of 1945 </ref>
|Phrase coined in a short story by [[Rudyard Kipling]] that has come to refer to an attitude that espouses individual ability and responsibility and not reliance on [[entitlements]]
|-
|[[capitalism]]
|1850-1855
|creating jobs and wealth based on a private invention, ownership and investments rather than state-controlled resources
|-
|[[carpetbagger]]
|1868
|a politician who moves to a new area to be elected to a government position, as in [[Hillary Clinton]] moving to [[New York]] to become a U.S. Senator
|-
|catharsis
|1775
|facilitating forgiveness and spiritual renewal by expression, as in writing or teaching or confession
|-
|caucus
|1763
|citizens or representatives gathering to meet and reach political decisions as a group while harnessing aspects of the [[best of the public]]; a favorite term of President John Adams, who wrote the Massachusetts Constitution and played a role in developing the [[Declaration of Independence]]
|-
|chaperone
|1720
|care and well-being of youths overseen by adults
|-
|citizen's arrest
|1941
|private enforcement of the law without the need of a taxpayer-funded police officer
|-
|civil defense
|1939
|civilians protecting themselves and their community against attack or natural disasters
|-
|claptrap
|1799
|pretentious, verbose, and often liberal nonsense; example usage: "the professor wasted the rest of the class on his liberal claptrap"
|-
|closed shop
|1904
|a business that requires membership in a union as a condition of working there; 22 conservative states prohibit this
|-
|[[Coase theorem|Coasean]]
|1980s
|an efficient result or bargain based on market forces without the distortions caused by [[transaction costs]]
|-
|Columbian
|1757
|relating to Christopher Columbus ''or the United States''
|-
|Cold War
|1947
|recognition that communist nations were at war with American freedom even in the absence of actual military conflict
|-
|competitive
|1829
|
|-
|Con Con
|1980s
|popularized by [[Phyllis Schlafly]] to highlight the deception and risks inherent in proposed national constitutional conventions
|-
|conservation of charge
|1949
|overall charge does not change in an isolated system; it is neither created nor destroyed; the concept was first suggested by [[Benjamin Franklin]] but the date of origin for this term is surprisingly recent
|-
|[[conservative]]
|1831
|
|-
|[[conservative field]]
|1870s?
|a type of physical force over a region such that items moving throughout the region can store energy ''without loss'', as in the planetary system and electrical products<ref>The mathematical definition of a conservative field -- which arises in [[multivariable calculus]] -- is that a scalar potential exists for the function and, alternatively, it is [[irrotational]].</ref>
|-
|constant
|1832
|(noun) something unchanging in value
|-
|constitutionality
|1787
|its date of origin is the year of the [[Constitutional Convention]] that proposed the [[U.S. Constitution]]
|-
|coolant
|1926
|a fluid, typically water, that facilitates efficient energy production, especially nuclear energy to cool a reactor and slow down the fission of neutrons
|-
|copacetic
|1890s<ref>Merriam-Webster officially lists its date of origin as 1919 and its source as unknown, but that is well after when Robinson says he developed it.</ref>
|Bill “Bojangles” Robinson, tap dancer extraordinaire, claimed the invention of this word; it was first popularized by African Americans
|-
|copyright
|1735
|extending private property to protect expressive works
|-
|correlate
|1742
|(verb) to show that one thing relates to another, such as [[atheism]] or [[homosexuality]] and selfishness or lack of charity; [[liberal]]s falsely rely on anecdotes to deny the general relationship
|-
|[[countability (Mathematics)|countability]]
|1874
|[[Georg Cantor]], loathed by the leading contemporary [[mathematicians]], developed this in proving that the real numbers are ''uncountable''
|-
|counterexample
|1957
|an example that is contrary to the proposition. A common point in logical, reasoned debate.
|-
|crackpot
|1884
|crazy talk, lunacy, a person on the fringe of reality
|-
|[[creation science]]
|1970s
|a term coined by the anti-[[evolution|evolutionist]] [[Henry Morris]].<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/28/AR2006022801716.html</ref>
|-
|cross-examination
|1824
|the most effective tool against [[liberal]] [[deceit]], better than even the requirement of an oath
|-
|crystal clear
|1815
|liberals are the opposite
|-
|[[culture war]]
|1991
|widespread use after the book ''Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America'' by James Davison Hunter
|-
|cyberbullying
|2000s
|a type of obnoxious and hurtful liberal behavior on the internet
|-
|[[deadweight loss]]
|1930s<ref>Confirmation of the first use is desired.</ref>
|the loss in overall wealth and efficiency imposed by monopolies and taxation, due to the loss in extra value that someone would have received beyond what he would have paid for a good at a free market price
|-
|death tax
|1989
|interestingly, the term was coined by Canadians opposed to the high estate tax on their assets held in the United States; Frank Luntz is credited with later popularizing this term in the United States.<ref>''See'' Dr. Frank Luntz, ''Words That Work: It's Not What You Say, It's What People Hear''</ref>
|-
|decentralization
|1846
|the dispersion of power, as in a shift from national to local control
|-
|decrypt
|1935
|military code-breaking, which played an instrumental role in World War II in deciphering enemy codes that many felt were unbreakable; illustrates the "can do" approach of conservatism in a patriotic way
|-
|[[defeatism]]
|1918
|a negative attitude that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy
|-
|deflation
|1891
|an increase in the value of savings
|-
|defund
|1948
|refers especially to termination of government funding of a wasteful or hurtful program
|-
|deliberative assembly
|1774<ref>''Introduction to Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised'' (19th Ed. 2000), xxv.</ref>
|used by Edmund Burke in describing the British parliament during a speech to voters in Bristol; he meant a body of persons meeting to discuss and decide common action under parliamentary law
|-
|demagogue
|1648
|
|-
|[[deregulation]]
|1963
|Reagan won in 1980 by campaigning on this.
|-
|design by committee
|before 1958
|pejorative term directed against collective production by a group
|-
|despotism
|1727
|a ruler with unlimited powers
|-
|[[deterrence]]
|1861
|
|-
|devalue
|1918
|describing an unwelcome attitude or act, as in "devaluing human life"
|-
|devotee
|1645
|ardent follower, supporter, or loyalty to. 56 years separates devotee and devoted
|-
|disinformation
|1950s
|false information spread (and sometimes manufactured) by groups with a strong political agenda
|-
|division of labor
|1776
|increasing productivity through specialization of labor, as in a husband working in manufacturing while his wife cares for children
|-
|domino effect
|1966
|how the fall of one nation to communism can result in its harmful spread to neighboring nations
|-
|double standard
|1894
|applying harsher criticism against one group, such as churchgoers or conservatives, than against another group, such as atheists or liberals; recognition of a double standard by the [[Prodigal Son]] led him to repent and convert
|-
|doublethink
|1949
|a term first coined by [[George Orwell]] in his dystopian novel ''[[1984]]''; it means simultaneously holding contradictory beliefs, which is a characteristic of [[status worship]]
|-
|doubting Thomas
|1883
|someone who believes only what he can see and touch, and doubts all else
|-
|dumb down
|1933
|
|-
|Eagle Scout
|1913
|the highest rank in the [[Boy Scouts]], the term also means "a straight-arrow and self-reliant man."<ref>Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (1994).</ref>
|-
|editorialize
|1856
|"to introduce opinion into the reporting of facts"<ref>Merriam-Webster (1994).</ref>
|-
|[[efficiency]]
|1633
|ultimately from the Latin ''efficientem'', meaning ''"working out, or accomplishing"''<ref>[http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=efficient Online Etymological Dictionary]</ref>
|-
|egotism
|1714
|the root of atheism, as explained by Paul in Romans 1:21-22; the root of depression and anxiety also
|-
|[[elementary proof]]
|1865
|a mathematical proof based on the minimum assumptions associated with real analysis; term probably does not predate [[complex analysis]] and its first use may have been the English mathematician James Joseph Sylvester's paper, "On an elementary proof and generalisation of Sir Isaac Newton's hitherto undenionstrated rule for the discovery of imaginary roots."<ref>http://www.archive.org/stream/circular129johnuoft/circular129johnuoft_djvu.txt</ref>
|-
|[[elitism]]
|1950
|
|-
|[[entitlement]]
|1944
|
|-
|entrepreneur
|1852
|
|-
|[[ethnic voting]]
|1900s
|widely recognized and even advocated by some,<ref>http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/5/2/3/4/p152345_index.html</ref> yet the dictionary doesn't yet recognize it
|-
|Eurosceptic
|1970s
|someone who opposes joining the super-socialist [[European Union]]; some prefer the term "Eurorealist" to express this opposition, and sometimes "Eurosceptic" is used to criticize opponents of the EU
|-
|exceptional
|1787
|same year of origin as the [[U.S. Constitution]]!
|-
|exculpatory
|1781
|often used in the phrase "exculpatory evidence," it took nearly 50 years to develop this term after origination of the legal term suggesting guilt: "incriminate"
|-
|faith healing
|1885
|
|-
|[[falsifiability]]
|1934
|first emphasized by Karl Popper in 1934, this helps define science: if a proposition is false, then it can be shown to be false. If not, then the proposition is not scientific.
|-
|[[family values]]
|1916
|widespread use after a speech by Vice President [[Dan Quayle]], 1992
|-
|father figure
|1934
|someone who fulfills the essential role of a father
|-
|[[federalism]]
|1789
|the unique system of dual sovereigns, state and federal (national), established by the [[U.S. Constitution]]
|-
|feedback
|1920
|an all-important element of accountability and improvement, and a key consideration in good engineering design
|-
|[[fellow traveller]]
|1925
|may have existed earlier, but popularized in 1924 by Leon Trotsky. Describes a sympathizer of a cause but who does not formally belong to the cause, such as a [[communist]] sympathizer who is not part of the communist party. The term was invented by the communists in its original, non-negative sense, but the conservatives were the first to use it as a pejorative term.
|-
|[[Flip flop (politics)|flip-flop]]
|1976
|''verb'', meaning to change political position, typically due to [[liberal]] pressure. First used by the Republican S.I. Hayakawa campaign to describe California Democratic incumbent U.S. Senator John Tunney, whom Hayakawa defeated in an upset.
|-
|force-feed
|1901
|what liberals do to students in [[public schools]] today in training them to be [[atheist]]ic socialists
|-
|forward-looking
|1800
|planning for the future rather than dwelling on the past
|-
|Founding Fathers
|1914
|the several dozen [[Christian]] men <ref>[http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html Religious Affiliation of the Founding Fathers of the United States of America, Adherents.com]</ref> who helped draft the formative documents of the United States
|-
|[[free enterprise]]
|1820
|
|-
|free market
|1907
|
|-
|free world
|1949
|areas of the world free of communism
|-
|galvanize
|1802
|as in, "the liberal proposals ''galvanized'' the grassroots in opposition"
|-
|gang up
|1925
|group pressure
|-
|gateway drug
|1982
|abuse of alcohol/marijuana eventually leads to harder drugs cocaine/heroin
|-
|gerrymandering
|1812
|coined by a newspaper editor to criticize the manipulation of the lines of a new district into a salamander shape<ref>http://www.allbusiness.com/information/publishing-industries/251259-1.html</ref> that favored election of a liberal politician
|-
|gimmick
|1922
|originally meant a deceptive mechanical device for controlling a [[gambling]] machine, and then its meaning expanded to include all trickery to attract attention
|-
|globalism
|1997
|MW states it was first used in 1943<ref>http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/globalism</ref> and the OED gives a date of 1965 for the exact term 'globalism'<ref>http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50095613/50095613se2?single=1&query_type=word&queryword=globalism&first=1&max_to_show=10&hilite=50095613se2</ref> the term "globalization" was first used in the mid-1980s in a different, complimentary sense.
|-
|godsend
|1820
|
|-
|go-getter
|1921
|
|-
|gold standard
|1831
|the highest standard; in currency, when money could be exchanged for a fixed amount of gold
|-
|Good Samaritan
|1640
|how genuine charity is the best approach
|-
|goon
|1926
|a dim-witted thug, espec. one who intimidates on behalf of a union
|-
|[[grade inflation]]
|1975
|the tendency by Liberal educationalists and public schools to increase marks, irrespective of merit or actual achievement.
|-
|[[grassroots]]
|1901
|
|-
|Great Awakening
|1730-1740
|Christian spiritualism recurs periodically. See [[Essay:The Coming Fifth Great Awakening in America]].
|-
|Gresham's law
|1858
|the tendency in a free market for bad money (which loses its value) to drive out (be used more often in transactions) than good money (which retains its value), because people want to horde the good money while getting rid of the bad money; a similar effect can be seen when profanity drives out intelligent discussion
|-
|groupthink
|1952
|a style of thought consisting of conformity to a manufactured consensus and self-deception; coined by William H. Whyte in 1952.
|-
|hallmark
|1721
|purity, authentic, official seal, distinguishing feature
|-
|hardworking
|1774
|
|-
|harmless error
|1861
|an insignificant violation of a duty or procedural rule; first used in ''Western Ins. Co. v. The Goody Friends'', 29 F. Cas. 764 (S.D. Ohio 1861) (referring to a duty)
|-
|hatchet job
|1944
|still looking for the context of its first use; today it means an article, typically by a liberal, that misleadingly smears someone, typically a conservative
|-
|Hawthorne effect
|1962
|the increase in achievement resulting merely from being observed; this was demonstrated by experiment at the Hawthorne Works of Western Electric in Cicero, Illinois
|-
|heckler's veto
|1965
|coined by University of Chicago Law Professor Harvey Kalven, Jr., a strong supporter of free speech in politics, this term has been used in [[Supreme Court]] decisions by Justices [[Sam Alito]],<ref>''See'' ''Pleasant Grove City v. Summum'', 129 S. Ct. 1125 (2009); ''see also'' ''Child Evangelism Fellowship of N.J., Inc. v. Stafford Twp. Sch. Dist.'', 386 F.3d 514 (3rd Cir. 2004).</ref> [[Antonin Scalia]], and [[Clarence Thomas]].<ref>''Good News Club v. Milford Cent. Sch.'', 533 U.S. 98 (2001)</ref>
|-
|Hobson's choice
|1649<ref>this term has the entertaining history of originating with an English liveryman who required customers to "choose" the horse closest to the door.</ref>
|an ostensible choice that disguises a lack of freedom, because each alternative is completely unacceptable. This term is invoked to criticize an illusory freedom of choice. This term has been used in 48 cases by Supreme Court Justices, more often by conservatives than by liberals.
|-
|honor system
|1903
|an approach to discipline that emphasizes and encourages trust, honesty and personal responsibility rather than constant supervision
|-
|[[homeschool]]
|1980<ref>the OED assigns a date of origin of 1850 to "homeschool".</ref>
|
|-
|[[homosexual agenda]]
|1989
|used to promote the agenda in the book ''After the Ball'', but then used to criticize the movement by Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] in his dissent in''Lawrence v. Texas'' (2003)''
|-
|human rights
|1766
|rights of all peoples, such as to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" as set forth in the [[Declaration of Independence]]
|-
|hypothesis
|1656
|a suggestion, typically scientific in nature, which must be tested and proven before asserted as truth
|-
|hysteria
|1801
|From the Latin ''hystericus'', from Greek ''hystera '' meaning ''"womb"''<ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hysteria Meriam Webster Dictionary]</ref> (an old notion that hysteria was caused by the [[womb]]).
|-
|identity politics
|1988
|exploiting politics for racial, ethnic, gender equality.
|-
|illiteracy
|1660
|liberals seek to produce illiterate voters who lack independence, and many graduates of the [[public schools]] are illiterate today
|-
|incidental inequality
|2009
|inequalities that result as side effects of an objectively just system
|-
|incoherent
|1626
|the term often applies to liberal [[double standard]]s
|-
|incompleteness
|1931
|a system of logic or mathematics that includes propositions that are impossible to prove or disprove; term coined as a result of [[Kurt Godel]]'s work in 1931
|-
|incrementalism
|1966
|imposing bad political or social change slowly
|-
|independence
|1640
|free will
|-
|individualism
|1827
|values, rights and duties arise from the individual
|-
|inflationary
|1920
|policies causing inflation of the monetary supply
|-
|informed consent
|1967
|consent to surgery is meaningful only if informed, a requirement that should apply to abortion
|-
|initiative
|1793
|self-starting first step toward improvement
|-
|insightful
|1907
|what conservatism is about: gaining insights into the truth, and bettering individuals and society with them
|-
|intangible
|1914
|something valuable that cannot be seen or touched, such as goodwill
|-
|intellectual property
|1845
|"we [should] protect intellectual property, the labors of the mind, productions and interests as much a man's own, and as much the fruit of his honest industry, as the wheat he cultivates, or the flocks he rears." ''Davoll v. Brown'', 7 F. Cas. 197 (Cir. Ct. Mass. 1845) (Woodbury, federal judge).
|-
|interventionism
|1923
|"governmental interference in economic affairs at home or in political affairs of another country"<ref>Merriam-Webster (1994).</ref>
|-
|invisible hand
|1776
|coined by Adam Smith in the ''Wealth of Nations'' and widely used today.
|-
|[[invisible hand of marriage]]
|2008
|discovered on Conservapedia, it is the unseen force of productivity that results from marriage (only between a man and woman).
|-
|Iron curtain
|1945
|coined by Winston Churchill in a speech in Missouri just after World War II, to describe the communist's figurative wall against freedom
|-
|[[irreducible complexity]]
|1996
|coined by [[Michael Behe]] as a structure or system that could not possibly have evolved, because removing any part makes it nonfunctional, thereby showing that [[God]] must have created it whole into biology; if the [[Nobel Prize]] were not dominated by [[atheism]], Behe could win one for this insight.
|-
|ivory tower
|1910
|a description of the pampered culture of liberal [[professor values|professors]], and how far out of touch with the truth it is
|-
|John Hancock
|1903
|a personal signature, especially in a bold style that stands up for principles as John Hancock did with his signing the Declaration of Independence
|-
|[[judicial activism]]
|1947
|first coined in an article in ''Fortune'' magazine by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.,<ref>http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/278089</ref> and repeatedly used in U.S. Supreme Court opinions since 1967,<ref>''United States v. Wade'',
388 U.S. 218 (1967).</ref> yet as of 2009 [[Merriam-Webster]] dictionary still fails to recognize this widely used term.
|-
|judicial prejudice
|2009
|the bias of a judge in favor of a political correct identity group intended to rig outcome equality in favor of that group based on subjective bias rather than objective justice.
|-
|judicial restraint
|1942
|"Assuming that this court has power to act, it does not necessarily follow that it should act. ... In a number of situations, and in a number of cases, it has been held that courts should voluntarily refrain from using or asserting power. Where the use or assertion of power might be destructive of a well defined purpose of law or of a declared public policy such voluntarily imposed '''judicial restraint''' may be commendable."<ref>Osage Tribe of Indians v. Ickes, 45 F. Supp. 179, 184-85 (D.D.C. 1942) (emphasis added).</ref>
|-
|judicial supremacist
|2004
|one who advocates that the courts should be supreme over the other branches of government for certain legal issues; first coined in a book by [[Phyllis Schlafly]]; first used by the judiciary by the Michigan Supreme Court in ''Paige v. City of Sterling Heights'', 476 Mich. 495 (2006).<ref>A similar yet different concept, "judicial supremacy," was coined by [[conservative]] Supreme Court Justice [[Robert H. Jackson]] as the title of his book,'' The Struggle for Judicial Supremacy: A Study of a Crisis in American Political Power'' (New York: Knopf, 1941).</ref>
|-
|[[judicial taking]]
|1982
|the deprivation of private property due to a court decision; this concept was introduced by conservative Justice [[Potter Stewart]] in 1967, and the term was used for the first time independently by the Michigan and Hawaii Supreme Courts in the same month (!) in December 1982, and then used often in law review articles and Circuit Court decisions in the 2000s, and then four Justices of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] endorsed the principle in a decision in 2010, with two others accepting the possibility.
|-
|[[junk science]]
|1962<ref>http://rated.com/dir/Society/Issues/Environment/Opposing_Views/Junk_Science</ref>
|the corruption of the scientific method to advance other, often political, goals (such as [[Global Warming]])
|-
|jury nullification
|1948
|the power of a jury to overrule the law and acquit an ostensibly guilty defendant; the power was established in the colonies in 1735 in the trial of [[John Peter Zenger]], but this term was first used in state court by Pfeuffer v. Haas, 55 S.W.2d 111 (Tex. Civ. App. 1932) and in federal court by ''Skidmore v. Baltimore & O. R. Co.'', 167 F.2d 54 (2nd Cir. 1948)
|-
|kiss of death
|1943
|from Judas's betrayal of Jesus with a kiss, Mark 14:44-4
|-
|kowtow
|1826
|obsequious, unthinking obedience to someone or something, used especially in the context of dictatorships and liberal belief systems
|-
|Kremlinology
|1958
|the study of the otherwise indecipherable behavior of the government of the [[communist]] [[Soviet Union]]. Refers to the Kremlin, the traditional seat of Russian government (Soviet or not).
|-
|labor camp
|1900
|forced work prison
|-
|laissez-faire
|1825
|opposing governmental interference in economic affairs beyond what is minimally necessary
|-
|lame duck
|1761
|one falling being in achievement, especially a public official whose power is limited because his term in office is set to expire without possibility of reelection.
|-
|lamestream media
|2009
|coined by Bernie Goldberg to describe the clueless [[Mainstream media]] that repeat superficial, discredited liberal claptrap
|-
|landslide
|1838
|In the political sense, an overwhelming election victory. A clear, democratic expression of popular will.
|-
|leadership
|1821
|an ability and willingness to lead, often by example
|-
|leftism
|1920
|principles and doctrine of leftists
|-
|leverage
|1830
|
|-
|life vest
|1939
|a pro-life invention
|-
|local
|1824<ref>This date refers to its first usage as a ''noun'', which is an estimate of its adoption as a concept.</ref>
|common usage: "all politics is local"
|-
|locomotive
|1829
|a great engine of economic growth during the [[Industrial Revolution]]
|-
|lone wolf
|1909
|a person who prefers to work, act, or live alone. <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lone%20wolf Lone wolf, Merriam-Webster]</ref> synonymous with self-sufficiency
|-
|loose cannon
|1973
|an undisciplined person or program that dangerously lacks forethought; used in mid-November 1976 to describe $11 billion in unspent appropriations by the Ford Administration: "'That money,' says Arnold Packer, a senior Senate Budget Committee economist who is helping Carter draw up his shadow budget, 'is like a loose cannon rolling around the deck' because a sudden reappearance of the funds could be inflationary." (''BusinessWeek'')
|-
|lunatic fringe
|1913
|coined by U.S. President [[Theodore Roosevelt]] to describe members of eccentric, radical or extremist groups<ref> http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=lunatic</ref>
|-
|machismo
|1948
|a word never used favorably by feminists!
|-
|man-hater
|1970s<ref>This was during the epic struggle -- and defeat -- of the so-called [[Equal Rights Amendment]].</ref>
|William Safire wrote in the ''New York Times'' in 1983, "Misandry, from the Greek misandros for 'hating men,' is in the 1961 Merriam-Webster New International Dictionary, and the Oxford Dictionary Supplement traces it to 1946. The word is pronounced as 'Ms. Andry,' but I wonder why we need the Greek word for it. What's wrong with good, old-fashioned man-hater?"<ref>Sunday, Oct. 30, 1983, Section 6, Page 12, Column 3.</ref>
|-
|make-work
|1923
|inefficient or useless activity that has the false appearance of being productive; a favorite endeavor of liberals
|-
|manifest destiny
|1845
|Providential design over future events, which originated in the context of expanding the United States to the Pacific Ocean
|-
|materialism
|1748
|the view of life that physical matter is all that exists; as an "ism", the term criticizes such view
|-
|melting pot
|1912
|requires "social and cultural assimilation" for successful immigration<ref>Merriam-Webster dictionary (1994)</ref>
|-
|[[meritocracy]]
|1958
|
|-
|[[microeconomics]]
|1947
|the study of the economics of the individual person or business
|-
|mindset
|1909
|close-minded point-of-view, typically in adherence to a liberal falsehood and often to the exclusion of Christ
|-
|missile defense
|1980s
|popularized by President Ronald Reagan as part of [[SDI]]
|-
|missionary
|1625
|someone sent on a mission, typically a religious mission
|-
|mobocracy
|1754
|rule by a mob, as at Wikipedia
|-
|monogamy
|1612
|this has the same date of origin as "productive", and that may not be a coincidence!
|-
|motivation
|1873
|can you believe the word did not exist before 1873?!
|-
|muckety–muck
|1912
|a pejorative term for an arrogant person who holds a title or position considered to be important by others
|-
|muckraker
|1910
|a person who searches out and publicly exposes [[deceit]]<ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/muckraker Merriam-Webster - Muckraker]</ref>
|-
|Murphy's Law
|1958
|if something can go wrong, then it will go wrong: this was a conservative insight by an engineer Edward Murphy
|-
|muscle car
|1967
|placing a powerful engine in a classic two-door car for highly efficient performance; also celebrate masculine style against erosion by feminism
|-
|myopic
|1752
|originally a term in optometry, 1990's used to describe liberals' lack of foresight
|-
|nanny state
|1978
|"Under the New Economic Policy, [the new French Prime Minister Raymond] Barre has made it clear that industrial lame ducks can no longer count on the generosity of Nanny i.e. the state - for bailing out."<ref>Leo Ryan, "Economy Shored up: France's new surge of liberalism," The Globe and Mail (Canada) (Aug. 1, 1978)</ref> Note how two powerful new conservative terms led to a third here!
|-
|negativism
|1824
|mental attitude that tends that is skeptical about almost everything, except one's own views
|-
|newspeak
|1949
|political or media expressions using circumlocution and euphemisms to disguise or distract from the truth; first coined by [[George Orwell]] in ''[[1984]]''
|-
|non-justiciable
|1922<ref>Used by the state attorneys for West Virginia (including Philip Steptoe, founder of Steptoe & Johnson) in ''Pennsylvania v. West Virginia'', 262 U.S. 553 (1923): "It is not the 'subject of judicial cognizance,' Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1, 15; Louisiana v. Texas, 176 U.S 1, 15; Missouri v. Illinois, 180 U.S. 208, 233, or 'susceptible of judicial solution.' Louisiana v. Texas, 176 U.S. 1, 18, 22; Missouri v. Illinois, 180 U.S. 208, 233, 234."</ref>
|a difficult issue that the courts should not attempt to resolve, often because it is too political in nature
|-
|non-locality
|1920s
|[[action at a distance]] at the atomic level; even though proven, it is still opposed by those who believe in [[relativity]] and still not recognized by Merriam-Webster
|-
|Old Glory
|1862
|the ''United States of America'' flag, Stars & Stripes
|-
|one-size-fits-all
|1996<ref>Was there an earlier conservative use? Frank Zappa's album cover in the 1970s does not count!</ref>
|Lee Wishing, director of communications for conservative [[Grove City College]], in criticism of how the government administers student loans: "Unfortunately, with government programs, it's one size fits all."<ref>http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/1996/dec96/er-dec96.html</ref> The 2008 Republican platform states, "We reject a one-size-fits-all approach and support parental options, including home schooling, and local innovations such as schools or classes for boys only or for girls only and alternative and innovative school schedules."<ref>http://platform.gop.com/2008Platform.pdf</ref>
|-
|one-trick pony
|1980
|a person or group that relies repeatedly on the same gimmick, as in "the media are a one-trick pony in their criticism of [[Rand Paul]]"
|-
|open-minded
|1828
|see [[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness]]
|-
|[[opportunity cost]]
|1911
|
|-
|optimism
|1759
|
|-
|originalism
|1985
|taken from original intent, The belief that the United States Constitution should be interpreted in the way the authors originally intended it
|-
|Orwellian
|1960s
|terminology or style that advances the power of big government but is hurtful or nonsensical<ref>http://www.ntu.org/main/press.php?PressID=604</ref>
|-
|ostensibly
|1765
|having an outward appearance that may not reflect the underlying truth; good potential use is Luke 3:23 in describing Jesus as the son of Joseph
|-
|parenting
|1958
|children raising
|-
|Parkinson's Law
|1955
|how bureaucracies expand regardless of the productivity, and how inefficient work expands to fill the time available for its completion
|-
|[[patent troll]]
|2001
|a company that obtains or buys up patents for the sole purpose of asserting infringement claims, and without any intention of actually manufacturing the invention; the term was first coined by Peter Detkin, in-house counsel to Intel
|-
|patriotism
|1726
|
|-
|Pavlovian
|1926
|a conditioned, automatic and unthinking response to a signal; it has been used twice by [[conservative]] Supreme Court Justices. "It is well established that this Court does not, or at least should not, respond in Pavlovian fashion to confessions of error by the [[Solicitor General]]." ''De Marco v. United States'', 415 U.S. 449, 451 (1974) ([[Rehnquist]], J., dissenting); "'[[Incorporation doctrine|Incorporation]]' has become so Pavlovian that my Brother BLACK barely mentions the [[Fourteenth Amendment]] in the course of an 11-page opinion dealing with the procedural rule the State of [[Florida]] has adopted for cases tried in Florida courts under Florida's criminal laws." '' Williams v. Fla.'', 399 U.S. 78, 144 (1970) ([[Potter Stewart|Stewart]], J., dissenting and concurring).
|-
|perpetual war
|1947
|Coined by historian Charles A. Beard,<ref>Charles A. Beard is best known for interpreting the Constitution as being primarily motivated by economic interests.</ref> it has been used most recently by [[Ann Coulter]]
|-
|[[personhood]] <ref>[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/personhood Personhood] Dictionary.com</ref>
|1955
|Inherent rights guaranteed to all human beings from the beginning of their biological development, including the pre-born, partially born. Also, the state or fact of being a person.
|-
|Philadelphia
|1682
|coined by [[William Penn]] and meaning "city of brotherly love," the concept captures the "[[best of the public]]" approach
|-
|[[phonics]]
|1684
|conservatives have long championed phonics to promote literacy, Bible-reading, and informed voters; liberals take the opposite position
|-
|phony
|1900<ref>This surprisingly recent origin appears to be derived from a British confidence game.</ref>
|needed to address [[liberal deceit]]
|-
|political machine
|1905
|a pejorative term for local and typically Democratic power structures that prevent outsiders from winning elections; first used by George Washington Plunkitt to criticize the Tammany Hall machine for which he served
|-
|[[politically correct]]
|1983
|This term originated among radicals at the [[University of Wisconsin-Madison]] to enforce radical orthodoxy, but immediately flipped in usage to become a term of mockery of radicals.<ref>For an early different usage of the word, see 1793 J. WILSON in U.S. Rep. (U.S. Supreme Court) 2 (1798) 462 Sentiments and expressions of this inaccurate kind prevail in our..language... ‘The United States’, instead of the ‘People of the United States’, is the toast given. This is not politically correct.</ref> The term may have come from Chairman Mao in 1936.
|-
|politicize
|1846
|seeking political gain at the expense of truth or quality<ref>The Merriam-Webster definition (1994 ed.) is incomplete and unclear: "to give a political tone or character to"</ref>
|-
|[[post-abortive]]
|1986
|the unexpected trauma and physical harm -- which can worsen over time -- that is experienced by a woman after having an [[abortion]]; coined by Dr. Kaye Cash in an editorial describing what she learned during a 365-mile walk in southeast Arkansas to speak with the public about abortion<ref>Editorial by Kaye Cash, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (Little Rock, AR), October 23, 1986.</ref>
|-
|potential
|1817<ref>Usage here refers to "promise", not "possibility".</ref>
|
|-
|privatize
|1940
|to return a business or enterprise from state to private control; to de-nationalize.
|-
|proactive
|1933
|
|-
|productive
|1612
|
|-
|productivity
|1810
|the gap of about 200 years between the creation of "productive" and "productivity" is astounding
|-
|[[pro-life]]
|1960
|
|-
|property right
|1853
|
|-
|provocateur
|1919
|someone who spends more time causing unproductive conflicts rather than advancing knowledge, accomplishing legitimate goals, or helping anyone
|-
|quantify
|1840
|
|-
|race card
|1995<ref>This is the date of its widespread familiarity.</ref>
|"Playing the race card" consists of relying on racial emotions or charges of racism in order to overcome the truth and logic in politics, legal proceedings, or otherwise; this term became familiar in the criticism of the defense and acquittal of O.J. Simpson for the murder of his ex-wife and her friend.
|-
|rapture
|1629
|spiritual ecstasy[http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=rapture]
|-
|[[recidivism]]
|1886
|the tendency for people lacking in [[faith]] and determination to revert to prior patterns of harmful behavior, such as repeat criminal offenders
|-
|recuse
|1949
|self-removal by a decision-maker (especially a judge) because of possible bias with respect to the pending issue
|-
|red tape
|1736
|excessive bureaucracy and procedural complexity which frustrate meaningful activity and progress
|-
|[[relativism]]
|1865
|the view that ethical truths are not absolute, but depend on the person or group that holds them
|-
|[[responsibility]]
|1737
|1787 HAMILTON Federalist No. 63 II. 193 Responsibility in order to be reasonable must be limited to objects within the power of the responsible party.
|-
|reverse discrimination
|1969
|the use of quotas or affirmative action to use race or gender to discriminate against a better qualified person
|-
|revisionism
|1903<ref>The first use of this term, now obscure, refers to a Marxist movement that preferred evolutionary rather than revolutionary change.</ref>
|distortions of history to promote liberal bias
|-
|riot act
|1715<ref>Its colloquial use, as in "read them the riot act," began in 1819.</ref>
|the Riot Act was a law passed in England in 1715 to authorize officials to disperse riots
|-
|sacred cow
|1910
|a person or idea, typically liberal, that becomes immune from criticism because of its political usefulness rather than its truthfulness, as in the theories of [[evolution]] and [[relativity]]
|-
|scapegoating
|1943
|a term criticizing how people, particularly liberals, deflect accountability and blame from themselves to others; inspired by Leviticus 16:8.
|-
|salutary neglect
|1775
|coined by the [[conservative]] [[Edmund Burke]] in his 1775 speech to the British [[House of Commons]] entitled "On Moving His Resolutions for Conciliation with the Colonies"<ref>http://www.archive.org/stream/burkesspeechonco00burkuoft/burkesspeechonco00burkuoft_djvu.txt</ref>
|-
|school choice
|1980
|popularized by Milton Friedman in his book, ''Free to Choose''
|-
|[[scientific fascism]]
|2009
|a coordinated effort by a group of scientists to enforce a certain point of view upon others.
|-
|Segway
|2001
|Dean Kamen's trademark spelling of "segue" for use of Yankee Ingenuity to improve efficiency, to refer to a form of battery-powered transportation.
|-
|[[self-defense]]
|1651
|
|-
|self-destruct
|1968
|often the tragic result of liberal falsehoods
|-
|[[Discipline|self-discipline]]
|1838
|
|-
|self-reliant
|1848
|
|-
|separation of powers
|1748
|the fundamental insight underlying the [[U.S. Constitution]]
|-
|skullduggery
|1867
|underhanded or unscrupulous behavior
|-
|slippery slope
|1900s
|term has been widely used for decades to expose the fallacy of "it doesn't hurt to try"
|-
|smoke and mirrors
|1979
|something intended to disguise or draw attention away from an often embarrassing or unpleasant issue. <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/smoke%20and%20mirrors Smoke and Mirrors, Merriam-Webster]</ref> Widely used during the 1990s to describe [[Bill Clinton]]'s political strategy.
|-
|smoking gun
|1974
|a law-and-order term, "smoking gun" was first used as figurative term in a reported judicial decision in ''Rodgers v. United States Steel Corp.'', 1975 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12775 (W.D. Pa. Apr. 20, 1975), and many literal uses of the term in court decisions before that!
|-
|[[socialist]]
|1827
|someone who advocates government control over the economy, and particularly state control of the means of production
|-
|social justice rhetoric
|2009
|Language and rhetorical ploys equating equality of outcome with justice.
|-
|spend-and-tax
|2009<ref>http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/02/morning-bell-the-obama-tax-and-spend-economy-is-here/</ref>
|a variation on "tax-and-spend" (see below), "spend-and-tax" consists of spending the money first and then trying to justify raising taxes based on the deficit created by the spending
|-
|stalking horse
|1788
|a candidate or issue that serves to increase the chances that ''another'' will win, as in "antifederalists attempted to win elections by using 'the stalking horse of amendments.'"<ref>''Centinel'', 1788 (quoted in ''The Federalist party in Massachusetts to the year 1800'', By Anson Ely Morse).</ref>
|-
|[[statism]]
|1919
|advocates for centralized government and government ownership
|-
|straightforward
|1806
|something liberals are not
|-
|straw man
|1896
|an imaginary argument or example set up for the purpose of easily knocking down, while distracting from valid arguments
|-
|Stupaked
|2010
|hurt by someone who reassured everyone he would do the right thing, but then switched at the last minute to do the opposite (refers especially to [[abortion betrayal]]s)<ref>Columnist Kathleen Parker is credited with first coining this term.</ref>
|-
|supply-side
|1976
|the economic theory that reducing taxes expands economic activity by encouraging greater earnings and investments; proven successful during the Reagan Administration in the 1980s
|-
|takeover
|1917
|as in the takeover of government by the communist revolution in that year
|-
|tax-and-spend
|1937
|not yet recognized by Merriam-Webster, it is included in dictionary.com and it means the liberal policy of raising taxes and increasing government spending
|-
|taxpayer
|1816
|the word highlights who is really paying for things
|-
|[[term limits]]
|1861
|can you believe this is not in the dictionary yet? Merriam-Webster omits it, but dictionary.com has it<ref>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/term+limit</ref>
|-
|terrorism
|1795
|this was during the French Revolution
|-
|[[textualism]]
|1952
|first used by Justice [[Robert Jackson]] in his influential concurrence in ''[[Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer]]'', 343 U.S. 579 (1952), it now describes the legal philosophy of Justice [[Antonin Scalia]]
|-
|top-notch
|1900
|the highest quality, which requires respect for merit to recognize
|-
|[[totalitarianism]]
|1926
|term which identifies the similarities of fascist and communist regimes and ideologies and urges resistance
|-
|tour de force
|1802
|a feat of skill
|-
|trademark
|1838
|extends the concept of private property to the marks used by business
|-
|traditionalist
|1856
|"adherence to the doctrines or practices of a tradition...the beliefs of those opposed to modernism, liberalism, or radicalism"<ref>http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/traditionalist</ref>
|-
|[[transaction cost]]
|1961
|Economist [[Ronald Coase]] won a [[Nobel Prize]] for this.
|-
|[[transistor]]
|1948
|named by John R. Pierce and developed at the [[conservative]] [[Bell Labs]], this invention epitomized Yankee ingenuity; Pierce was a critic of claims of [[artificial intelligence]] and was the future developer of [[Telstar]], a precursor to the [[Strategic Defense Initiative]]
|-
|tree huggers
|1970s
|still not recognized by the dictionary, this term criticizes extreme environmentalists, but they proudly use the term also to describe what they literally do
|-
|trivia
|1920
|insignificant detail, which can sometimes obscure what is important and distract people from the Bible; liberal [[Wikipedia]] is filled with trivial junk
|-
|Trojan horse
|1837
|describes a type of liberal [[deceit]]: subversion from within
|-
|trust but verify
|1980s
|popularized by President Ronald Reagan as the approach to use towards communist [[deceit]]
|-
|ugly duckling
|1883
|an unpromising appearance but often with great unseen potential
|-
|ultra vires
|1793
|beyond the authority, especially of a government or corporate official
|-
|unborn child
|1791
|the rights of the unborn child have been recognized in English law since the 1600s, but the specific term "unborn child" itself may have been first used by an attorney arguing before the New Jersey Supreme Court in ''Den v. Sparks'', 1 N.J.L. 67 (Sup. Ct. 1791)
|-
|underdog
|1887
|[[David]] v. [[Goliath]], [[Cinderella]], [[best of the public]], etc.
|-
|underemployed
|1908
|having less than full-time or suitable employment
|-
|vandalism
|1798
|malicious destruction of someone else's property
|-
|veracity
|1623
|devotion to truthfulness
|-
|vet
|1904<ref>http://www.slate.com/id/2199254/?from=rss</ref>
|a verb meaning to screen for flaws
|-
|[[victimization]]
|1840
|
|-
|volunteer
|1618
|someone who freely offers to help
|-
|wannabe
|1981
|a word that criticizes liberal [[status worship]]
|-
|War on Terror
|2001
|no listing at Merriam-Webster February 2, 2009 Obama ends use of the conservative lexicon. <ref>[http://pewforum.org/news/display.php?NewsID=17455 Obama administration drops 'war on terror' phrase] Pew Forum, February 2, 2009</ref>
|-
|waterloo
|1816
|a final defeat or setback, coined merely one year after the [[English]] defeated [[Napoleon]] at the [[Battle of Waterloo]]; there has never been a "waterloo" for [[Christianity]] or [[conservatism]]
|-
|wildcatter
|1883
|a pro-energy term that describes someone who drills for oil in fields not known to have oil
|-
|word poverty
|2001<ref>http://www.aft.org/pubs-reports/american_educator/summer2001/lang_gap_moats.html</ref>
|popularized by President [[George W. Bush]]
|-
|work (physical sense)
|1826
|a physical measure<ref>force times distance</ref> of effort used to increase energy
|-
|work ethic
|1951
|a habit of working as a moral good
|-
|worldview
|1858
|a comprehensive way of looking at life and the world; sometimes used to criticize a liberal's irrational belief system
|-
|yellow journalism
|1898
|the practice, started by newspaper publishers Joseph Pulitzer and his rival William Randolph Hearst, of sensationalizing and biasing newspaper headlines and articles in order to influence public opinion
|-
|}

__TOC__ 

== Conservative Words Not Yet Recognized by the Dictionary ==

A thousand new words are developed in English each year. Here is a growing list of conservative concepts, each of which is not yet defined by a single word or two.

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Not Yet Recognized Terms
!Suggestions
!Comments
|-
|pre-9/11 thinking
|9/10 mindset
|terror is jurisdiction of the courts
|-
|anti-family
|tradition opposer, familiopathic
|
|-
|causing harm by spreading falsehoods
|deceit
|e.g., denying or concealing disease and infertility caused by promiscuity
|-
|cradle to grave <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/spanish/from%20cradle%20to%20grave cradle to grave- no entry found] Merriam-Websters</ref>
|sanctity of life, conception to natural death
|pro-life stance, also can mean socialist entitlement programs
|-
|cut and run
|surrender advocates
|when the going gets tough, run away from the problem
|-
|[[deliberate ignorance]]
|mind-locked, self-centered pride obscuring the truth
|the term exists; the dictionary does not yet include it
|-
|denial that [[Hell]] exists
|Hell-denier? Antinfernal? (Should be "antihadessic" so as not to mix Hellenate and Latinate roots)
|
|-
|[[abstinence denial|denier of the effectiveness of abstinence]]
|abstinence-denier?
|
|-
|drive-by media
|partisan slander
|liberal mainstream media assault on the GOP or conservative principles, deceitful attacks for opposing viewpoints
|-
|[[earmark]]
|
|spending on specific projects at the request of a particular congressman, and without meaningful examination by others voting on it
|-
|easily amused by [[deceit]]
|dolophile
|from Greek/Latin root ''dolo-'' meaning guile, deceit, deception [http://www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view_unit/664]
|-
|family-friendly
|wholesome
|describes TV programming, websites, social events that are not offensive
|-
|Hatred of one's country, refusal to recognize the good elements of it, or unreasonably critical of it
|misopatria, misopatrist
|From Greek ''misein'', to hate, and Latin ''patria'', nation or homeland
|-
|heavenly body
|celestial body
|natural objects visible in the sky
|-
|hellbound
|
|recognized by over 1.3 million sites in a Google search and no substitute term is available, yet dictionaries refuse to recognize it
|-
|Hoax and Chains
|[[Keynesian economics]]
|a phonetic play on the rhetoric slogan of Hope and Change. Hope replaced by unemployment and Change represents obsessive tax burdens.
|-
|hoax plant
|fake townhall, kkk teaparty
|a term to describe a deceitful method of placing an operative that appears to be part of a group in order to push an agenda or to make a competing agenda look ridiculous.
|-
|[[Hollywood values]]
|West Coast Hedonism
|Over 800,000 results on Google, not yet recognized by Merriam-Webster
|-
|[[Illegal Alien|illegal alien]]
|
|widely used in court decisions and political discourse for years, Merriam-Webster still does not recognize it is as a term.
|-
|infotainment
|tabloid news, dramacast
|mainstream media presents drama fluff stories as news, e.g. 20/20 - Datelin
|-
|[[limited government]]
|we the people democracy
|first testament to this was the [[U.S. Constitution]], defining [[Reagan]]s presidency, can't be found in Merriam-Websters. <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/limited%20government Limited government - Not found] Merriam-Webster's</ref>
|-
|[[limousine liberal]]
|hypocrite
|rich promoting causes which they themselves don't adhere to
|-
|merit pay
|performance bonus
|Doing your job better with perks as a reward. The typical liberal union teacher avoids merit pay at all costs, self before students.
|-
|[[militant gays]]
|intimidating homosexual
|
|-
|modern idolatry
|"media idolatry"; "money idolatry"; "celebrity idolatry"
|idolatry conjures images of golden calves, and a modern version is needed
|-
|moral fabric
|domestic tranquility
|ethics and virtues united for the common good of all
|-
|morally bankrupt
|[[atheism]], self-void
|ethically and spiritually challenged souls
|-
|opposite of [[global warming]]
|regional warming
|the North pole shrinks as the South pole increases
|-
|opposite of [[materialism]]
|spiritualism and idealism have been its philosophical opposites, historically
|[[dualism]] has been suggested, but it is not the ''opposite'' of [[materialism]]; "spiritualism" is not a common term and is the "opposite" of materialism
|-
|[[peer pressure]]
|used in titles to professional journal articles as early as 1994
|can you believe that isn't recognized by Merriam-Webster?
|-
|proven wrong, a refusal to admit it
|mulism; heel-digger?
|cf. mulish. This refusal is what promoted the [[Parable of the Good Samaritan]].
|-
|religious right
|Christian conservatives
|religion in America almost exclusively a conservative institution, no religious left term in existence.
|-
|reward failure
|TARP
|too big to fail, bailout bankrupt, mismanagement subsidized
|-
|rewrite history <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/rewrite%20history rewrite history not found, Merriam-Websters]</ref>
|[[deceit]], mislead
|Commonly used term describing liberal deceit to hide, defraud others about factual history.
|-
|rogue states
|rogue nations
|nations defying international law, only rogue is listed in Merriman-Websters
|-
|runaway jury
|The term has existed for decades, but Merriam-Webster has not recognized it yet.
|
|-
|Rule of Law
|
|
|-
|[[schlockumentary]]
|propaganda film
|documentary films based on falsehoods and half-truths
|-
|[[Second generation atheist|second-generation atheist]]
|cradle atheist
|
|-
|selective outrage
|partisan hypocrisy, bipolar
|to be against something to further a cause and reject, stay silent, ignore or discount something similar.
|-
|smear merchant
|serial slander
|to constantly hurl degrading or false accusations against others
|-
|strict constructionism
|
|an important term for over 200 years to describe adherence to the text of the Constitution, Merriam-Webster still does not recognize it.
|-
|[[Conservative| Traditional Values]]
| principles of Conservatism
|much the same as family values but incorporating all aspects society; family, religion, self-sufficiency, the truth, hard work. Only listed in Merriam-Websters to describe what Nilihism is against.
|-
|true emergency
|life support
|meaning a high probability of serious injury or death to an individual or property. Emergency has been watered down, e.g. to be locked out of one's car.
|-
|Unaffected by, or impervious to, the media
|mediaproof
|cf. bulletproof. ''Once John became aware of the extent of [[liberal deceit]], he set about mediaproofing his mind''.
|-
|}

== New Liberal Terms ==

New liberal words often have deceptive, or nonsensical, meanings. Here are some new words created by liberals to combat [[conservatism]]:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!New Term
!Origin date
!Comments
|-
|[[agnosticism|agnostic]]
|1860
|someone who claims to not know whether [[God]] exists but still lives like an [[atheist]]
|-
|[[atheism|atheist]]
|1571
|useful and often deceptive alternative name for an anti-Christian
|-
|[[Big Bang theory|big bang]]
|1948
|term invented by the leading [[British]] physicist Sir [[Fred Hoyle]] to ''mock'' this suggestion of how the universe was formed, but later accepted as a serious term rather than mockery;<ref>Compare this migration with that of "politically correct," which started out as a serious term but then adopted a sense of mockery</ref> it's liberal because it trivializes the beauty and the [[faith]] of the moment
|-
|bilingual education
|1972
|a euphemism describing a costly and hurtful program that hinders the learning of English by foreign-born children in American [[public school]]s, which hurts their future opportunities
|-
|[[carbon footprint]]
|1999<ref>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/carbon%20footprint</ref>
|this term indicates an individual human's effect on the environment by production of carbon dioxide
|-
|chairperson
|1971
|even Alice Sturgis, the leading parliamentarian of the 20th century, rejected this cumbersome form of political correctness.
|-
|check-off
|1911
|automatic deduction of union dues by the employer from the employee's paycheck, so he has no choice
|-
|[[class warfare]]
|
|first entered the political lexicon primarily as an attack by liberals against conservatives. <ref>[http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20030115.html The art of "class warfare"], Ben Fritz, Spinsanity.org, January 15, 2003</ref>
|-
|[[communism]]
|1840
|
|-
|compassionate-care clinics
|2008
|a term describe pot-shops that dispense medical marijuana <ref>[http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/11/magazines/fortune/medical_marijuana_legalizing.fortune/?postversion=2009091116 How marijuana became legal, CNN, September 11, 2009]</ref>
|-
|compassion fatigue
|1968
|liberals, driven by materialistic self-interest, are likely to suffer from this.
|-
|[[condescension]]
|1647
|treating another person as though they are inferior
|-
|[[creationism]]
|1880
|like most "isms", creationism is a derogatory term coined preferred most by opponents of it.
|-
|[[Dark Ages]]
|1730
|a term coined in the so-called [[enlightenment]] to disparage the period between the fall of the [[Roman Empire]] and c.1000, when the Christian faith, and its learning and culture, spread across Europe.
|-
|[[Dead white males|dead white males]]
|
|a disparaging term used of significant figures from previous generations by those who wish to undermine [[Cultural Literacy|cultural literacy]]
|-
|deconstruction
|1973
|a style of interpretation of texts that looks beyond the plain meaning of the text in order to infer or accuse the writers of social bias
|-
|diva
|1883
|modern use to describe female Hollywood/media personalities
|-
|[[Détente|detente]]
|1970s
|a euphemism referring to pacifist policy re. the Soviet Union
|-
|displaced foreign traveler <ref>[http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2010/07/bureaucrats-now.html Bureaucrats Now Call Illegal Aliens "Displaced Foreign Travelers", Moonbattery.com, July 21, 2010]</ref>
|2010
|another politically correct term for [[illegal alien]].
|-
|distributive justice
|
|a term used to redefine socialist abridgment of rights as "just"
|-
|[[enlightenment]]
|1669
|
|-
|[[Environmentalist|environmentalism]]
|1922
|a mixture of [[pseudoscience]] and neo-[[paganism]] used to justify the imposition of [[socialist]]ic controls.
|-
|[[exclusionary rule]]
|1964
|an invented rule that requires censoring and withholding from the jury certain incriminating evidence about a criminal defendant, simply based on how the evidence was obtained.
|-
|[[family planning]]
|1939
|planning intended to determine the number and spacing of one's children through birth control <ref>[http://mw1.m-w.com/dictionary/family%20planning Family Planning, Merriam-Webster]</ref>
|-
|freethinker
|1692
|the euphemism "free" hides the hostility towards faith, which is not free
|-
|[[fundamentalism]]
|1922
|"a movement in 20th century Protestantism emphasizing the literally interpreted Bible as fundamental to Christian life and teaching"<ref>http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fundamentalism</ref> From a series of pamphlets called "The Fundamentals" which outlined the movement. Perjorative usage started when the liberal [[Harry Emerson Fosdick]] began using the term in a straw man attack against [[Conservative Christianity]].
|-
|[[feminism]]
|1895
|notionally, "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes"; in reality, the attempt to destroy traditional family, societal and religious values by erasing or undermining natural gender differences.
|-
|[[gay rights]]
|1969
|the movement for civil rights for homosexuals
|-
|glass ceiling
|1984
|the notion that an invisible barrier prevents women and ethnic minorities from reaching high office; an excuse for [[feminist]]s and others to demand [[affirmative action]]
|-
|[[global warming]]
|1969
|the baseless [[environmentalist]] mantra that the earth's temperature is rising, and that human intervention is the cause.
|-
|[[goth]]
|?
|"a style of rock music, noted especially for somber or ethereal tones and lugubrious lyrics", or someone who performs or listens to this style of music.<ref>Dictionary.com, ''goth'' [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/goth]</ref> Goths often "dress in black with heavy jewelry".<ref>Dictionary.com, ''goth rock'' [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/goth%20rock]</ref> The term is taken from the name of "a Germanic people who invaded the Roman Empire in the early centuries of the Christian era".<ref>Dictionary.com, ''goth'' [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/goth]</ref>
|-
|gun control
|1969
|a euphemism for restricting the right to keep and bear arms
|-
|[[homophobia]]
|1969
|used by Liberals to describe a failure to subscribe 100% to the [[homosexual agenda]].
|-
|[[humanism]]
|1808 <ref>http://newhumanist.org.uk/1740</ref>
|
|-
|[[imperialism]]
|1851
|a clever term later used by liberals to interfere with Christian missionaries and stopping anti-Christian tyranny
|-
|[[isolationism]]
|1922
|a pejorative term that is critical of American politicians putting America first in priorities
|-
|Keynesianism
|1946
|advocacy of 'tax and spend' policies as elaborated by the economist [[John Maynard Keynes]]; a [[euphemism]] for back-door [[Socialism]].
|-
|[[Living Constitution]]
|2000
|a continually evolving Constitution (first used by presidential candidate Al Gore, title of a 1936 book by Howard McBain)
|-
|main squeeze
|1968
|one's romantic partner, typically in an unmarried relationship
|-
|McCarthyism
|1950
|originally, investigations by Sen. Joe McCarthy of Communists working in sensitive USA government jobs. Later, it more broadly refers to holding radical leftists accountable for their beliefs and loyalties.
|-
|[[metrosexual]]
|1994
|fashion and glamour man
|-
|moderate
|late 1900s
|the original term dates from the French Revolution, but its meaning today is a euphemism for someone who favors abortion and/or supports censorship of Christianity in some ways.
|-
|[[moving the goalposts]]
|late 1980s
|a sports analogy designed to avoid answering a logical follow-up question; this is a favorite term of evolutionists to avoid addressing obvious deficiencies in their theory
|-
|nationalize
|1800
|a euphemism for the government taking over ownership and control of a large company or entire industry, as in socialism
|-
|natural selection
|1857
|a misleading and euphemistic term for the theory that genetic advantages and conflict dictate survival
|-
|[[Nihilism]]
|1817
|a rejection of the values system, independently anarchist from society norms.
|-
|[[population control]]
|1968
|the issue of population dates back to Confucius. Liberals promoted the term after the book The Population Bomb by Paul R. Ehrlich
|-
|[[pro-choice]]
|1975
|a euphemism for insisting on taxpayer-funded [[abortion]]; people who claim to be pro-choice typically oppose ''informed'' choice, which makes the "choice" meaningless
|-
|[[progressivism]]
|1892
|the progressive movement was not entirely liberal; it was started by a Republican and shared some goals with conservatives, and still does
|-
|[[psychoanalysis]]
|1906
|contributed to de-spiritualization of human beings
|-
|public option
|2009
|obfuscate rewording of government control
|-
|[[quote mining]]
|non-existent
|a term used by [[evolutionists]] to describe taking quotes out of context in order to damage the position of the quoted party.
|-
|reproductive health
|1994 <ref>defined by the United Nations (UN) in 1994 at the Cairo International Conference</ref>
|abortion supporters jargon for rights/justice for pregnant women, no rights/justice for the child.
|-
|[[Sexual Discrimination|sexism]]
|1968
|That which is practiced by those who do not give total support to [[feminism]].
|-
|shovel-ready <ref>[http://skylineviews.typepad.com/skyline_views/2009/04/is-it-time-to-add-shovelready-to-the-dictionary.html Is it time to add shovel-ready to the dictionary? Skyline Views, April 24, 2009]</ref>
|2008
|jobs and people ready to work if funded
|-
|situation ethics
|1955
|a euphemism for denying fixed ethical standards
|-
|stimulus packages
|2009
|used by government(s) to be perceived as taking unprecedented measures to stimulate aggregate economic demand; during a crisis on economic growth and private jobs, liberal government entities are known to deceptively take advantage of its subject in the form of "stimulus packages," as an opportunity to pursue policies that further social and environmental agendas.<ref>[http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/12/62/42555546.pdf For a stronger, cleaner, ''fairer'' world economy], ''Organisation For Economic Co-Operation and Development'' (OECD), 2010.</ref>
|-
|strict liability
|1869
|court-imposed liability even when there is no evidence of any fault by the defendant
|-
|sustainability
|1727
|[[environmentalism|environmentalist]] buzzword
|-
|Swift-Boating
|2004
|allegations of unfair campaign tactics.
|-
|transforming society
|2008
|Obama, Rahm and Axelrod use this term. It dates to [[Saul Alinsky]] and Chicago politics. <ref>[http://marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930# Mark Levin Show, July 7, 2009]</ref>
|-
|transnationalist
|2006
|popularized by Yale Law School Dean Harold Koh in a 2006 law review article: "The transnationalists view domestic courts as having a critical role to play in domesticating international law into U.S. law ...."<ref>Penn State Law Review (2006).</ref>
|-
|undocumented immigrant
|2000
|a [[politically correct]] replacement for illegal alien.
|-
|unfair
|1700
|
|-
|union shop
|1904
|
|-
|[[Unitarian]]
|1687
|
|-
|will to power
|1907
|[[Nietzsche]]'s concept of the drive of a superman to perfect himself by exercising creative power; it didn't catch on
|-
|woman's rights
|1833
|women equal to men; the defining movement to justify aborting babies in the 20th century
|-
|}

== Rate of Generation of Liberal Terms ==

The rate of generation of liberal terms is increasing, but not with the enduring value of the conservative terms and not with their geometric rate of increase. A remarkably high percentage of new liberal terms originated in the 1960s, suggesting that new liberal terms arise in a sporadic manner heavily influenced by culture:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Century
!# New Liberal Terms
|-
|1600s
|4
|-
|1700s
|2
|-
|1800s
|11
|-
|1900s
|31 (9 in the 1960s)
|-
|2000s
|6
|-
|}

== Terms Difficult to Classify ==

These new terms are difficult to classify:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Term
!Origin date
!Comments
|-
|[[affirmative action|affirmative action]]
|1961
|first used in [http://www.thecre.com/fedlaw/legal6/eo10925.htm JFK's Executive Order 10925] in 1961 and subsequently promoted by [[LBJ]].
|-
|[[American exceptionalism]]
|1980<ref>An estimate; it originated no later than 1983.</ref>
|coined by sociologist Daniel Bell, its meaning today is unclear; it is used to urge exporting American-style elections to the rest of the world as urged especially by [[neoconservatives]].
|-
|Americanism
|1781
|Originally, a phrase unique to American English, later, loyalty to America and its principles
|-
|bipartisan
|1909
|emphasized by liberals when they are in the minority in power, but ignored by liberals when they are the majority in power
|-
|colonist
|1701
|settlers of a new country
|-
|compartmentalize
|1925
|compartmentalizing the Bible away from knowledge and education leads to ignorance and despair
|-
|eclectic
|1683
|taking the best from among different styles or ideas; compare [[best of the public]]
|-
|evangelism
|1620-30
|"isms" are usually pejorative, though this acquired a positive meaning over time, and perhaps from the outset
|-
|genetics
|1905
|perhaps this should be on the conservative list?
|-
|inane
|1662
|refers to comments, often made by liberals, that are utterly devoid of substance
|-
|junk legislation
|1980s
|used initially by liberals to complain about the lack of meaningful legislation
|-
|missionary
|1635-1645
|conservative?
|-
|multitasking
|1966
|performing multiple tasks all at once
|-
|polar coordinates
|1694
|Newton may have used it earlier
|-
|republican
|1685
|
|-
|scrooge
|1843
|the main character in Charles Dickens' ''A Christmas Carol''; the story is based on materialism and is often used as a substitute for the Biblical account, but charity is a conservative value
|-
|smoke and mirrors
|1982
|describes the use of deceit, particularly in politics; probably a conservative term, but will await more etymology about it
|-
|soapbox
|1907
|now used pejoratively, but probably not initially when it was a way for the public to participate
|-
|states' rights
|1790
|liberals often invoke this too; Democrats were its biggest champions in the 1800s (in connection with slavery), and even today on issues like legalizing drugs and same-sex marriage
|-
|technocrat
|1932
|technical expert
|-
|telecommute
|1974<ref>The first use of this term was in the British magazine ''The Economist''.</ref>
|a combination of a Greek root ("tele", which means "far off") and a Latin root ("commutare", which means "to exchange")
|-
|tomfoolery
|1812
|playful or foolish behavior
|-
|traditionalism
|1856
|"beliefs of those opposed to [[modernism]], [[liberalism]], or [[radicalism]]"
|-
|[[twilight zone]]
|1949
|the realm of imagination that seems impossible but is difficult to disprove, and which challenges ordinary views of reality; also the terminator between night and day on a planetary body
|-
|wiki
|1995
|a website (or website software) that facilitates contributions and corrections by the public
|-
|}

== Downgraded Conservative Terms ==

These conservative terms are less significant:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Term
!Origin date
!Comments
|-
|byzantine
|1794<ref>The usage here -- in sense of complex governmental rules -- probably developed later.</ref>
|
|-
|eleemosynary
|1616
|relating to charity
|-
|[[entropy]]
|1868
|
|-
|[[filibuster]]
|1851
|
|-
|incandescent
|1794
|bright and radiant, conquering darkness, precursor to the invention of the incandescent lamp (light bulb)
|-
|luddite
|1811
|one who opposes and even destroys technological advances
|-
|media
|1923
|
|-
|[[milquetoast]]
|1933
|timid and unassertive; easily persuaded or exploited
|-
|normalcy
|1920
|related to the election of [[Warren G. Harding]] by the largest margin yet in history
|-
|ne'er-do-well
|1736
|"an idle worthless person" - Merriam-Webster
|-
|reticent
|1834
|restrained in expression, presentation, or appearance
|-
|self-indulgence
|1753
|
|-
|smart aleck
|1856
|an obnoxiously conceited and self-assertive person with pretensions to being superior to others. Etymology: Aleck, nickname for Alexander <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smart%20alec Smart Aleck Merriam-Websters]</ref>
|-
|}

== Sources ==

*[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ Merriam-Webster dictionary]
*[http://dictionary.reference.com/ Dictionary.com]

== See also ==

*[[Essay:Conservapedia's Law]]
*[[Essay:Surprising Dates of Origin for Terms]]
*[[Linguistic Analysis of Candidates]]
*[[Conservative Bible Project]]

{{Conservatism}}
{{Conservapedia}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}
[[Category:Essays]]
[[Category:Conservative Bible]]
[[Category:Featured articles]]

Talk:Essay:Best New Conservative Words

2010-08-22T00:17:47Z

ChrisGT90: /* 33 million sites turn up in a Google search for "anti-Christian" - Wrong! */

'''[[/archive1 | Archive 1 ]]''' 
'''[[/archive2|Archive 2 ]]'''
----

==Mother Nature==
In the New Liberal Terms section, I put the term Mother Nature in the list. Is it right?--[[User:Willminator|Willminator]] 18:40, 22 April 2010 (EDT)

I won't argue whether or not Mother nature is a liberal term on the grounds that I think the distinction between conservative and liberal words is dubious at best, however it is most certainly not a new word. The idea of mother nature is as old as the ancient greeks or older. --[[User:BenjaminS|Ben]] [[User Talk:BenjaminS|Talk]] 18:46, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

:That's a clever way to dispose of a vexing question.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:56, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

Well I don't want to waste your time by arguing the point Mr. Schlafly. If you want to put the term back in feel free. --[[User:BenjaminS|Ben]] [[User Talk:BenjaminS|Talk]] 19:24, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

How is it dubious? Also, I haven’t heard of any writings or speeches where the term Mother Nature was used hundreds of years ago. Show me at least one speech or writing where the term was used. Liberals use it to discredit Father God’s role in creation. They think that it was nature, not God, who made us. To Liberals, nature is their goddess. Funny how Wikipedia’s article on Mother Nature denies the atheistic, evolutionary and environmental implications of the term.--[[User:Willminator|Willminator]] 19:55, 22 April 2010 (EDT)

:Look up "Gaia" or "Terra Mater" - "Mother Nature" or "Mother Earth" has been around thousands of years. [[User:PaulBurnett|PaulBurnett]] 22:23, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

::The idea of personifying all of nature as a woman surely predates the liberalism of 20th century and early 21st century America. But the way in which the natural world came into existence, specifically the planet Earth which supports all life known to exist, is unknown to science: speculation is not "science" unless expressed as a theory to which a counterexample could conceivably be found (see [[falsifiability]]).

::Those scientists who deny God's role in [[Creation]] are committing the same intellectual offense they accuse [[intelligent design]] theorists of. It is also not "science" to comment on metaphysical ideas, unless we grant that the scientific method can be applied to matters beyond [[physical science]].

::The trick which liberals are playing with their anti-conservative words is to pretend that they are talking about one thing, while they are actually talking about another. This is literally the oldest trick in [[Bible|the book]]; recall that the serpent tempting Eve told her, "You will not die" yet Jesus explained later on many occasions that "life" and "death" correspond to being able or unable to love God. So eating the forbidden fruit did indeed cause Eve's death. (See verses like, "You have the name of being alive, but you are dead" in Revelations and, "Let the dead bury their own dead" in Luke 9)

::We need precise definitions of words, to prevent being tricked and fooled by deceivers with a hidden agenda. The so-called "[[peace movement]]", for example, never wanted [[peace]] but simply the victory of America's anti-[[democracy|democratic]] enemies. The "save the earth" movement is not at all concerned with preserving the environment for the well-being of human beings: it's an excuse to increase centralized control over resources, in a way which will destroy prosperity, hurting the world's poor more than any one else.

::Now it's a matter of personal belief for me that God has a feminine aspect; my church specifically teaches that the [[Holy Spirit]] is feminine, and that God is a being whose harmonized masculinity and femininity are reflected in men and women (see Gen. 1:27) but I won't preach here. The issue is the relationship between Nature and human beings.

::Liberals claim that science has proved [[Evolution]] without providing any evidence for it, let alone discussing a means by which the theory might be falsified (thus providing a highly prominent example of [[pseudoscience]]). Then they misuse this idea to hint that science has also discovered the source of the physical world ([[Big Bang]] theory) and the [[origin of life]]. Of course, when pressed, they must concede that the Theory of Evolution does not tell us how life came into being. But high school biology textbooks write about life as if it simply "evolved" from inorganic chemicals. This, by the way, is a great example of how New Liberal Words are misused to trick people. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 07:10, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

:::That's a fascinating analysis, Ed. Thank you for sharing it. I appreciate the suggestion that the [[Holy Spirit]] is feminine. Usually groups of people, like nations or large audiences, are considered to be more feminine than masculine in nature.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:13, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

== "Bully pulpit" ==

How about "bully pulpit"? When Teddy Roosevelt coined this, "bully" meant something like "excellent" rather than overbearing.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:47, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

I guess it's kind of like the word gay. At first gay meant happy and now it means something else.--[[User:Willminator|Willminator]] 19:55, 22 April 2010 (EDT)

==Definition==

I think this article needs a clear definition of what is meant by "conservative words." As I was reading it, I found it unclear as to whether it's about words invented by Conservatives or words representing Conservative values. I gather it's the latter, but I had to look in the talk page to find that. Either way, the introduction to the article isn't very clear and I'm reluctant to write a definition since I'm not sure I'm on the same page as the contributors. Would someone care to do that? [[User:EMorris|EMorris]] 13:49, 2 June 2010 (EDT)

== 33 million sites turn up in a Google search for "anti-Christian" - Wrong! ==

For the term "anti-Christian" the article claims "thirty-three million sites turn up in a Google search."

Where did this number come from? Go to Google and type in "anti-Christian" (in quotes) and you get 945,000 hits. Type in "anti-Christian" (NOT in quotes - which is totally sloppy Googling) and you get 7,590,000 hits. Where did the "thirty-three million" come from? [[User:PaulBurnett|PaulBurnett]] 22:11, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

: That's an interesting observation, Paul. The number of Google links retrieved for the search "anti-Christian" has fallen substantially. That begs the question of why.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:18, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

::Should we correct that number in the article? [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 22:41, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

:::Please improve as you think best!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:58, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::The user who added that ([[User:DrewDice]]) was subsequently blocked for prevarication. The one-million figure Andy added seems about right in my searches. [[User:KyleDD|KyleDD]] 23:05, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

:::::Before you round the number down, consider rounding it up. [http://www.google.com/search?q=anti+Christian&hl=en&lr=lang_en&as_qdr=all&prmd=inl&sa=X&ei=eQldTN2RGIWBlAeU8uCbCA&ved=0CBEQpwU&source=lnt&tbs=lr:lang_1en,cdr:1,cd_min:,cd_max:] The answer is 74.6 million. Google anti Christian with no quotes, no hyphens, English language only. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 03:24, 7 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::That is true, but such a Google search would include Christian sites about "[[pro-life|anti-abortion]]" stances or "[[homosexuality|anti-Biblical]]" lifestyles. [[User:KyleDD|KyleDD]] 21:43, 17 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::A good indication that my search results are accurate can be judged by the first 10 page results, nothing but anti-Christian in the title. Does it include anti-abortion and anti-American? Possibly, we are talking 78 million pages but I didn't see any through the top 10. I frown on the smaller number of 1 million.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:14, 17 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::I'm sorry you feel that way. A good indication that your search results are inaccurate can be judged by using the "Search within results" function. Half a million of your results pertain to the Christian "anti defamation" commission. Another half million are for "anti abortion". 184,000 deal with "anti immigration". And the list goes on and on...173,000 are about the punk rock band "Anti-flag". I'm sure hundreds of thousands more results are about things that people named Christian don't like. The only way to accurately gauge the use of the phrase "anti Christian" on Google is to search for that phrase, not its components. [[User:KyleDD|KyleDD]] 11:50, 18 August 2010 (EDT)

:::::::::I did a search for anti-Christian both with and without the hyphen when Paul Burnett first brought the issue up, and both returned the same number of hits (about the 7.5 million he mentioned). I think that Jpatt may have misread the number and moved the decimal place over. Even now, I'm only getting 10.8 million hits, both by typing in what Jpatt described or by clicking his link. I'm changing the article now to say 10 million, but I think the number should ultimately be removed. It just changes to quickly for the article to stay up-to-date unless somebody is going to check every morning. Also, on the first page of ten results, on is a list of anti-Christian movies, one is lamenting the anti-Christian bias in America, and one is against anti-Christian defamation. If you want to only use the first 10 results as a sample of the 10 million (which anybody who's taken a statistics course would tell you is a horrible idea), about 30% of those results are nothing hostile towards Christianity. [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 23:12, 18 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::::JPatt's search results extended further into the past than a normal google search. For the same reasons I explained to him, your 10 million number is inaccurate (you can verify by searching within your results). I'm changing it back to 1 million for the time being, but maybe you're right that it should be removed outright. No one doubts that it is a widely-used term. [[User:KyleDD|KyleDD]] 17:54, 20 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::::::There are 10.8 million results when you search anti-Christian on Google. The claim being made was not that there were X million results hostile towards Christianity, just that there were X million results. No attempt was made at qualifying them, and the statement in the article does not indicate any attempt at qualifying them. It doesn't matter if only one in ten of those results is actually something anti-Christian; the claim is only about how many results there are. I'm changing it back to 10 million, because that's how many results there are (not good results, or relevant results, just results in any form). With that being said, it is a fairly pointless claim to make, because we don't know how many of those results actually '''are''' anti-Christian, we only know that they make some reference to "anti-Christian." [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 20:17, 21 August 2010 (EDT)

== Adding Obama Portmanteaus ==

I've noticed the list does not have any of the Obama portmanteaus, like [[Obamanation]], [[Obamunism]], etc. Shouldn't these terms be added? They are great for described the unfortunate turn this country is taking. [[User:JonS|JonS]] 17:13, 27 June 2010 (EDT)

== Underdog ==

Conservative term imho. Seeker of greatness against the odds. Cinderella story. David (underdog) slays Goliath. The meek (underdog) shall inherit the Earth. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 03:09, 10 July 2010 (EDT)

: I agree that "underdog" is a conservative term, and I will promote it now. Thanks for mentioning this.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 08:42, 10 July 2010 (EDT)

== Excellent scholarship ==

In the face of such well founded scholarship, Liberals will never manage to disprove the remarkable growth pattern illustrating the doubling per century of Conservative words. Nevertheless, perhaps the essay could be improved slightly by adding that Conservative words are words that express a Conservative concept or words that are used significantly more often by conservatives than Liberals. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 17:20, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

: Not sure what confusion you're trying to clear up here. Conservatives words express insights that are conservative. These words are freely available to liberals and conservatives alike, though liberals may indeed irrationally try (in a fool's errand) to avoid using them.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:34, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

::The essay begins by mentioning Conservative terms, then a list of Conservative words and terms follows, nowhere in the essay is it made clear what Conservative words or terms actually are. That, I think, should occur at the beginning of the essay. Supplying a definition of what a Conservative term is, will underpin the observation that the data supplied irrefutably proves a "1-2-4-8" geometric increase for new conservative terms. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 14:51, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

:::Definition by example seems best here. Other proposed definitions are, of course, welcome.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:35, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

::Other definitions are not required, your own excellent, clear and concise definition that Conservatives words express [[conservative insights]] is more than adequate. However, [[definition]] by [[example]] begs the question, are the words in the list because they are Conservative or are the words Conservative because they are in the list? [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 15:48, 31 July 2010 (EDT)

:::The terms are obviously Conservative independent of being in this list. You wouldn't request a definition for "List of Words beginning with G", so why are you demanding a definition for "Conservative term"? Are the component words of the phrase that obtuse for you? We're not using them in any aberrant way. --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 18:04, 31 July 2010 (EDT)

::::Nowhere did I demand a definition, I merely suggested that providing one would underpin the excellent scholarship presented in the essay. G is a well established concept amongst literate people. "List of Words beginning with G" is a definition, therefore it logically does not require a definition. The term 'Conservative words' is not as well established as G, therefore a definition helps those unfamiliar with the term understand it and benefit from Mr Schlafly's excellent insights. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 16:57, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

:::::What you say cannot be true, because in the world I live in, people know and understand what "conservative" means, and they don't need it spelled out for them. Talking about the "excellent scholarship presented in this essay" smacks of sarcasm from the tone of the rest of your post. If you were a ''real'' conservative, you wouldn't have to be asking what a "conservative word" was. --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 21:29, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

::My suggestion to elaborate was in order to elucidate the term 'Conservative words' not the word 'Conservative'. The elucidation is intended for visitors unfamiliar with the term, not for myself. Many come to Conservapedia seeking an alternative to the atheistic anti-Christian misinformation, gossip and pornography prevalent elsewhere on the internet. Elucidation enables such people to better understand and appreciate what Conservapedia has to offer, and may facillitate bringing them into the fold, so that they may also profit from the many [[Essay:Conservative Benefits|Conservative benefits]]. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 18:01, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

:::If liberals are so devoid of intelligence or honesty to clearly understand the simple application of an adjective to a noun, then why should we dumb down our article just for their pea-sized brains? --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 21:57, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

"AmandaBunting" (if that really is your name), I've reviewed your contributions and you're not doing much more than talk, talk talk. We conservatives favor substantive contributions to this project, so if all you can do is complain on talk pages, Wikipedia might be a better place for you and your misguided ideology. It's obvious you're not here to help anyone learn. [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 18:18, 31 July 2010 (EDT)

:I am neither complaining nor have I a misguided ideology. I am simply making substantive suggestions about how I think this excellent essay may be improved. As a Conservative I would have expected more [[Chivalry|chivalrous]] behaviour here, there is [[Essay:Rules of Chivalry for Students|much you can learn]] from Conservapedia. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 16:57, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

::But you didn't suggest a definition, even though one would have been (and still is) welcome from you. Wikis are not answer boxes; they are places where people contribute ideas and ''substantive'' edits, and then others improve them.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:34, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

:::I had already mentioned that other definitions are not required because you had already supplied supplied an excellent, clear and concise definition that Conservatives words express Conservative insights. I have added that to the essay, furthermore the definition itself links to the insightful article [[Conservative insights]]. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 17:38, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

== Maggie Thatcher ==

Great article. How about some of Margaret Thatcher's great new conservative terms:
* U-turn: What liberal politicians do all the time
* There is no alternative: Liberals pretend that they have an alternative to conservative values
* Oxygen of publicity: What liberals want to give to terrorists
* Fight to win: What conservatives should do!
[[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 19:03, 14 July 2010 (EDT)
:Get this! Adding those four terms takes the total for the 20th century to 160 - we're getting very close to a perfect geometric progression. [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 19:07, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

:: Thanks for the suggestions, but I'm not sure the above terms meet the high quality level of the entries. Perhaps because "Maggie" was actually not very conservative by American standards? She seemed fine with nationalized health care, for example.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:29, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

== Possibility ==

''quack'', coined 1638, to refer to charlatans deceiving others with pseudoscience. Used extensively today to describe the favorite "medicines" of new-age liberals. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 20:40, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

: Interesting and informative suggestion. However, the term strikes me as name-calling rather than insightful. I'm not sure its use would be consistent with our rules!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:26, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

== Kiss of Death ==

The term "Kiss of Death" clearly originated earlier than 1943, as the article would suggest, as there was [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiss_of_Death_%281916_film%29 a 1916 film by that name]. In fact, I'm not convinced this was the origin of the term, which has probably been in use since Judas' betrayal. [[User:DanieleGiusto|DanieleGiusto]] 22:01, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

: Your link to Wikipedia is broken, and the movie was probably a literal rather than figurative use of the word. Merriam-Webster gives a date of 1943.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:24, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

::Fixed the link; thanks for the heads-up. [[User:DanieleGiusto|DanieleGiusto]] 13:38, 16 July 2010 (EDT)
-

== Possibility for 1800's: Carpetbagger ==

While the term originally related specifically to northern politicians interjecting themselves into the politics of the Reconstruction-era south, it has since come to be used for political opportunists in a more general sense. Since this sort of behavior is common among Democrats (Hillary Clinton, anyone?) I'd argue that the term has value as a conservative word. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 12:52, 19 July 2010 (EDT)

: "Carpetbagger" is a fascinating suggestion. [[Hillary Clinton]] and [[Robert F. Kennedy]] were modern senatorial examples. Perhaps there are other modern examples also.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:45, 19 July 2010 (EDT)

:::Well...hmm. There's John Garamendi, the former lieutenant governor of California, who ran for election to the House in a district where he didn't live. His defense, as I recall, was "Well, I don't live there, but my front yard's in the district." (It wasn't.) --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 17:26, 19 July 2010 (EDT)

== Research method ==

I just wanted to point out that actively looking for words to fit the geometric rate of growth, from a scientific point of view, is a biased method of research. You will ALWAYS find words in a 1-2-4-8 geometric growth rate, if that's what you actively look for. A more neutral research method would be to ***randomly*** (I can't stress it enough, it MUST be random) pick up, say, 1000 words created after 1600, and see if they match that growth rate.

This method CAN lead to a scientific result, mind you, but only after ALL words created after 1600 have been taken into account, whether they match the growth rate or not. Feel free to refute my reasoning if I made a logical flaw in it, and if you think that actively choosing words to fit a 1-2-4-8 growth rate has scientific validity, please explain me why I am wrong. Thank you! --[[User:MarcoT2|MarcoT2]] 11:35, 20 July 2010 (EDT)

== Suggestion? ==

What does everyone else think about ''militant atheist''? I had to listen to someone rail at me for being a Christian on the train this morning '''for an hour''' and it got me thinking. I've been hearing the term since I was a kid, but that would probably fall into the 20th century. William Ayers anyone? My argument in favor is that most of them try to pass themselves off as peaceful, tolerant, etc, when (only my opinion here) that isn't really the case. We should call it as we see it here. I can't provide a year, but maybe someone with more experience can? What do you think? [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 13:23, 20 July 2010 (EDT)

== Selection Bias and Proposal for an Unbiased Test ==

===Selection bias===
The easiest way to see this is the history of your finds: You have repeatedly achieved what you call a perfect layer (1-2-4-8) of new conservative words, i.e. 1 word of the 17th century, 2 of the 18th century, 4 of the 19th century and 8 of the 20th century.

What's the probability to get a perfect layer? Here are the probabilities for the century of origin of a random conservative words, assuming that your insight is correct: 

<table><tr><th>Century</th><th>Probability</th></tr><tr><td>17th</td><td>1/15</td></tr><tr><td>18th</td><td>2/15</td></tr><tr><td>19th</td><td>4/15</td></tr><tr><td>20th</td><td>8/15</td></tr></table>

For a layer, we have to take 15 words. It's easy to calculate the probability that these 15 words form a perfect layer:

15!/(8!×4!×2!×1!) × (1/15)1 × (2/15)2 × (4/15)4 × (8/15)8 = 675675 × 234 / 1515 =0.0265

2.65% is the probability to chose 15 words and get a perfect layer instead of 2-1-4-8 or 1-2-5-7... And how often was this remarkable deed performed?

That you were able to repeat this process for a couple of times shows that you were actively (though not necessarily consciously) looking for words to match your pattern, i.e., you showed a selection bias - a kind of affirmative action for newer words...

: Selection bias exists in any study. The issue is not whether there is selection bias (there always is), but whether the selection bias is so great that it disqualifies the results. Unless there were a strong underlying pattern of increase by century, it would be almost impossible even with high selection bias to attain the resulting pattern of doubling by century.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:51, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

::*''Selection bias exists in any study. '' But most scientists try to avoid it (even in the social sciences), and try to monitor its effect. They most certainly should not embrace it as a way to make their point (that is, they are called on it when they do so...)
::*''Unless there were a strong underlying pattern of increase by century, it would be almost impossible even with high selection bias to attain the resulting pattern of doubling by century.'' But [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law|Conservapedia's Law]] doesn't claim that ''their is a increase by century''. No, it explicitly states that ''conservative insights increase over time at a geometric rate, as in 1-2-4-8-16-etc. For example, there is a doubling in effective new conservative terms per century.'' While their may an increase over the centuries, the rate of this increase (doubling, i.e. an increase by 100% by century) is an artefact of the way you perform your search: That is, even if the real rate is 70% , 130% - or 83% (the [[maximum likelihood estimator]] for your current set of words taken into account the year of their creation), you end up with a perfect fit of 100% - unless you have enumerated ''all'' conservative words at least for one century.
::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:44, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

===An unbiased test===
Andy, f you are interested in testing your insight, I really would like to help you. The hidden table below contains 500 words which - according to the Merriam-Webster - originated between 1600 and 2000. The list was generated by taking words of the ubuntu-dictionary at random and checking their age automatically via the site of Merriam-Webster. This was repeated until 500 feasible words were found. 

If you mark each conservative word with an "r" (and perhaps each liberal word with an "l"), we'll get an estimate of the percentage of conservative words - and a fairly unbiased distribution over the time.

Please be aware that the distribution of this sample doesn't follow a geometric law. Here are the number of words by century of origin:
<table><tr><th>Century</th><th>Number of Words</th></tr><tr><td>17th</td><td>151</td></tr><tr><td>18th</td><td>84</td></tr><tr><td>19th</td><td>161</td></tr><tr><td>20th</td><td>104</td></tr></table>

: Your proposed test is an interesting one, and I do see far more conservative words from the 1700s than the 1600s. Indeed, I'm pleasantly surprised how many conservative words show up in your random selection, as I never claimed that conservative (or liberal) words were a substantial percentage of all new words generated.

:That said, the defect in your proposed test is the weakness in dictionaries publishing more recent new conservative words from, say, the 1900s. Dictionaries are good at defining old words, but not-so-good at recognizing and defining relatively new concepts. That's what we need Conservapedia for! :-).--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:07, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

::*''That said, the defect in your proposed test is the weakness in dictionaries publishing more recent new conservative words from, say, the 1900s. '' That's hardly a fatal flaw which would render the test useless. But we can even circumvent it: Let's just concentrate on the period 1600-1899! As you acknowledge that ''dictionaries are good at defining old words'', in the next list you will find 500 words from these three centuries. I assume that [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law|Conservapedia's Law]] should hold not only for the 20th and the 21st century. (the list is a wikitable with two columns, just add a marker for a conservative word in the second column. I omitted the years of the creation of the words (all taken from the Merriam-Webster) and I would advice you against checking the age before marking a word - though of course the age of quite a few words is apparent)
::*A dictionary is the obvious choice when talking about the number of words. But you are absolutely right that dictionaries are biased towards older words. I assume that the percentage of words in general use which were created in the 20th century is much higher than those of the 17th century! When one is interested only in the distribution of conservative words , one could sample over Conservapedia's articles, and try various methods to get the age of the newest words used. But this is of course more cumbersome than just looking into a dictionary, so I'll postpone it for a while.
::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:47, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

===Table of random words===
{|class="collapsible collapsed"
!500 words
|-
|1 economics
2 storeroom
3 hunkers
4 sufficing
5 coffeehouses
6 stalagmites
7 therapy
8 sanitation
9 cheapskates
10 Caesareans
11 ringmaster
12 acclimate
13 penology
14 verandah
15 caregivers
16 fed
17 disengaged
18 whitecaps
19 dissertation
20 consignment
21 chainsaws
22 speeds
23 kinfolk
24 caribous
25 hobbyists
26 coefficients
27 protuberance
28 morphemes
29 Caroline
30 millionaires
31 recyclable
32 wilts
33 unreconstructed
34 chandeliers
35 palomino
36 joysticks
37 volleys
38 cajoling
39 bucksaws
40 spars
41 portaged
42 acoustically
43 humanize
44 hybridize
45 tipsters
46 overprices
47 marksmanship
48 fezes
49 depressant
50 auctioned
51 flamethrower
52 biking
53 artistic
54 agribusiness
55 jottings
56 pedicures
57 Cordilleras
58 slots
59 recording
60 unrealistic
61 rationalism
62 peacekeeping
63 aromatherapy
64 jackknife
65 champagne
66 horrendous
67 Quasimodo
68 excavator
69 chowders
70 arts
71 configure
72 civic
73 telegraphy
74 sweepstakes
75 euphoric
76 strategy
77 subgroup
78 shouting
79 gusher
80 telemarketing
81 glucose
82 booties
83 preponderated
84 manures
85 outspokenness
86 wiener
87 embeds
88 amped
89 sternums
90 empathy
91 cognomina
92 colitis
93 kimono
94 retched
95 singletons
96 megaphoned
97 respelled
98 Hindus
99 squiggle
100 irrigates
101 reconstructions
102 deceptiveness
103 colonialism
104 missioned
105 dyes
106 maladroit
107 tents
108 turfs
109 generalization
110 seamanship
111 duffers
112 scruffier
113 pollinate
114 bobcats
115 achieved
116 exerted
117 flapjack
118 Independence
119 lucidity
120 indenturing
121 enumerable
122 disenchanted
123 flashback
124 trilogies
125 colloquially
126 Colby
127 killjoys
128 lifelines
129 hydrotherapy
130 psychoanalysis
131 memorializing
132 bronchitis
133 rink
134 automobiles
135 dandy
136 schoolmarms
137 debriefing
138 glands
139 oceanography
140 jetted
141 hurdler
142 dependability
143 tactician
144 rotor
145 liturgies
146 quantified
147 wests
148 quitters
149 ocarinas
150 betting
151 apathetically
152 smoggier
153 Xenia
154 saris
155 dupe
156 voodooism
157 optimize
158 particularization
159 funereally
160 masterminding
161 capsizes
162 orchestrates
163 uncivilized
164 emphasized
165 skyrocket
166 plagiarist
167 politicoes
168 streptococci
169 pantsuits
170 waving
171 decontaminates
172 teensy
173 taxonomy
174 proselytizes
175 drollness
176 expectoration
177 legmen
178 modulations
179 diploma
180 Brandy
181 radar
182 pushiest
183 drill
184 lush
185 temperas
186 musicals
187 wheal
188 horticulture
189 cancan
190 jocularity
191 caramels
192 bipolar
193 sophisticated
194 injudicious
195 emulsion
196 ignore
197 cannonballed
198 swastika
199 overachievers
200 rubella
201 chuckhole
202 ersatz
203 breeziness
204 climaxes
205 explosiveness
206 empathizing
207 jumps
208 secularizing
209 sequoia
210 bibliography
211 prettying
212 bouldered
213 authorship
214 vocalizing
215 tarpons
216 camisoles
217 cowpox
218 tans
219 breathable
220 machines
221 tycoon
222 flicking
223 squishes
224 semiprofessional
225 feline
226 seedling
227 hankie
228 entitlement
229 abscissa
230 derisive
231 romance
232 overprice
233 beads
234 stipple
235 Kitty
236 jewelled
237 mascaraed
238 dissociation
239 moments
240 Spica
241 quaking
242 legislation
243 wobbly
244 scorches
245 books
246 gastrointestinal
247 finked
248 renegotiates
249 flautists
250 wrongheadedness
251 allergenic
252 squishiest
253 kickoffs
254 mecca
255 disses
256 woodwinds
257 discotheques
258 replacements
259 tomahawks
260 voluptuaries
261 salon
262 eliciting
263 resale
264 soporific
265 dosage
266 smokestacks
267 rationalists
268 subsumed
269 futzes
270 minutemen
271 stingrays
272 marathoner
273 vagina
274 propellers
275 rooftops
276 sensationalist
277 bluejackets
278 individualize
279 hyphenating
280 Xanthippe
281 federated
282 amortize
283 airfare
284 hyphenates
285 syncopates
286 sermonizing
287 biochemistry
288 babysat
289 yellows
290 riskier
291 cassocks
292 stated
293 Cordoba
294 Slinky
295 eventfully
296 nines
297 blabbermouths
298 fraternizes
299 bucked
300 Boolean
301 bivalve
302 ricochetted
303 toys
304 toted
305 commissars
306 cushioning
307 redeploy
308 poignancy
309 variegating
310 snuffbox
311 stoplight
312 biochemists
313 bicycling
314 disenfranchised
315 nosing
316 enlightenment
317 knockout
318 resurgent
319 pediments
320 skyscrapers
321 treatments
322 polio
323 flashbulbs
324 empower
325 rounding
326 pervasive
327 humped
328 oxymora
329 freebie
330 passageway
331 barfing
332 motorists
333 triglycerides
334 Mayans
335 stopped
336 kidnapper
337 pensioning
338 foreclosures
339 Yankees
340 manifestoing
341 predictor
342 Delawares
343 librettos
344 panoply
345 angstroms
346 jodhpurs
347 backpedal
348 sugars
349 preclude
350 unravelling
351 Lilliput
352 motivator
353 enslavement
354 pencilling
355 flukey
356 amoral
357 depository
358 unemotional
359 stumpy
360 cartons
361 gal
362 ignitions
363 malingered
364 spotlighted
365 photographic
366 abnegated
367 dashing
368 atrocious
369 inanities
370 derricks
371 mountaineer
372 inseminate
373 sacrosanct
374 modernize
375 specializations
376 obliging
377 heckles
378 baccalaureates
379 bluebirds
380 lengthiest
381 octets
382 physiotherapist
383 disorganizing
384 toffees
385 unfurling
386 abnegate
387 bathrobe
388 socked
389 crepe
390 polkas
391 overwriting
392 punned
393 platoons
394 infrared
395 ensuring
396 decimate
397 baggiest
398 plungers
399 trampolining
400 centigram
401 Topsy
402 epochal
403 boogies
404 showrooms
405 pianofortes
406 Orphic
407 logbooks
408 amphibious
409 rapprochements
410 terms
411 Kalmyk
412 petering
413 geocentric
414 stills
415 ethnologist
416 exec
417 flairs
418 likableness
419 rods
420 melange
421 graduated
422 ante
423 voluminously
424 impaled
425 cognacs
426 yups
427 comfiest
428 strychnine
429 subsoiled
430 conics
431 Salish
432 windsocks
433 rutabaga
434 vacuumed
435 maestri
436 podiatrist
437 restructured
438 metrically
439 motorcade
440 zipping
441 unmoral
442 electioneered
443 minibikes
444 trillion
445 sudsier
446 actuator
447 acing
448 masochism
449 softeners
450 cocksucker
451 brig
452 verbs
453 buccaneer
454 confessed
455 filibustered
456 rearmed
457 melodramatics
458 swivelled
459 veggies
460 monochrome
461 hellos
462 escalators
463 Seyfert
464 bushwhack
465 encapsulation
466 combining
467 realists
468 playgrounds
469 teenage
470 glandular
471 tot
472 cyclical
473 tinsmith
474 commitment
475 undersells
476 orthopaedics
477 yardstick
478 Vivian
479 peppy
480 swatted
481 earlobes
482 snapshots
483 nitpicker
484 unities
485 depressants
486 briefing
487 halo
488 watermarking
489 electronics
490 inadequates
491 ghosted
492 rapscallions
493 snorkeler
494 percentages
495 relapsing
496 facet
497 inconsistently
498 takeout
499 acidify
500 password
|}
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:15, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

'''Second table: 500 random words 1600-1899'''
{|class="wikitable sortable collapsible collapsed"
!word
!date
!class
|-
|monsignor||align="right"|1607||C
|-
|productive||align="right"|1612||C
|-
|alertly||align="right"|1618||C
|-
|inconsistent||align="right"|1620||C
|-
|numerical||align="right"|1628||C
|-
|interlock||align="right"|1632||C
|-
|platoons||align="right"|1637||C
|-
|forevermore||align="right"|1641||C
|-
|identification||align="right"|1644||C
|-
|untenable||align="right"|1647||C
|-
|reversible||align="right"|1648||C
|-
|authentication||align="right"|1652||C
|-
|monotheistic||align="right"|1660||C
|-
|constructive||align="right"|1680||C
|-
|alphabetize||align="right"|1691||C
|-
|misconduct||align="right"|1705||C
|-
|propagandists||align="right"|1718||C
|-
|revelations||align="right"|1729||C
|-
|guaranteed||align="right"|1731||C
|-
|cohesiveness||align="right"|1731||C
|-
|systematizing||align="right"|1767||C
|-
|letdown||align="right"|1768||C
|-
|dissident||align="right"|1769||C
|-
|diagramming||align="right"|1785||C
|-
|backhanded||align="right"|1800||C
|-
|autocratically||align="right"|1823||C
|-
|socialistic||align="right"|1827||C
|-
|Mormonisms||align="right"|1830||C
|-
|westernize||align="right"|1837||C
|-
|trademarks||align="right"|1838||C
|-
|propagandized||align="right"|1844||C
|-
|graffito||align="right"|1851||C
|-
|Americans||align="right"|1855||C
|-
|optimize||align="right"|1857||C
|-
|outdistancing||align="right"|1857||C
|-
|rogues||align="right"|1859||C
|-
|birthrates||align="right"|1859||C
|-
|slob||align="right"|1861||C
|-
|quantifier||align="right"|1876||C
|-
|implode||align="right"|1881||C
|-
|housemother||align="right"|1882||C
|-
|scantier||align="right"|1600||
|-
|sierras||align="right"|1600||
|-
|arena||align="right"|1600||
|-
|toddled||align="right"|1600||
|-
|eventful||align="right"|1600||
|-
|catheter||align="right"|1601||
|-
|primarily||align="right"|1601||
|-
|labeling||align="right"|1601||
|-
|copings||align="right"|1601||
|-
|Pooh||align="right"|1602||
|-
|respectively||align="right"|1602||
|-
|embroiling||align="right"|1603||
|-
|haloes||align="right"|1603||
|-
|Iliad||align="right"|1603||
|-
|enthusiasm||align="right"|1603||
|-
|dragoons||align="right"|1604||
|-
|promised||align="right"|1604||
|-
|recollecting||align="right"|1604||
|-
|stentorian||align="right"|1605||
|-
|rivaling||align="right"|1605||
|-
|impregnates||align="right"|1605||
|-
|touchy||align="right"|1605||
|-
|impassive||align="right"|1605||
|-
|immediacy||align="right"|1605||
|-
|literary||align="right"|1605||
|-
|animosities||align="right"|1605||
|-
|volatile||align="right"|1605||
|-
|vegetates||align="right"|1605||
|-
|acclaiming||align="right"|1606||
|-
|onlooker||align="right"|1606||
|-
|sides||align="right"|1606||
|-
|wisher||align="right"|1607||
|-
|melancholia||align="right"|1607||
|-
|tab||align="right"|1607||
|-
|typical||align="right"|1609||
|-
|casuist||align="right"|1609||
|-
|bucolic||align="right"|1609||
|-
|footfalls||align="right"|1610||
|-
|bison||align="right"|1611||
|-
|lambing||align="right"|1611||
|-
|ticketed||align="right"|1611||
|-
|incompatibilities||align="right"|1611||
|-
|demonstrators||align="right"|1611||
|-
|reproduces||align="right"|1611||
|-
|longish||align="right"|1611||
|-
|amalgamations||align="right"|1612||
|-
|bailing||align="right"|1613||
|-
|caste||align="right"|1613||
|-
|convulses||align="right"|1614||
|-
|abscess||align="right"|1615||
|-
|valise||align="right"|1615||
|-
|cult||align="right"|1617||
|-
|hesitancy||align="right"|1617||
|-
|drill||align="right"|1619||
|-
|blotchy||align="right"|1619||
|-
|urban||align="right"|1619||
|-
|appositeness||align="right"|1621||
|-
|ingratiated||align="right"|1621||
|-
|ingrate||align="right"|1622||
|-
|diplomata||align="right"|1622||
|-
|exporters||align="right"|1623||
|-
|drolly||align="right"|1623||
|-
|adrift||align="right"|1624||
|-
|powwow||align="right"|1624||
|-
|oaf||align="right"|1625||
|-
|preconceptions||align="right"|1625||
|-
|ruse||align="right"|1625||
|-
|abominating||align="right"|1628||
|-
|dodo||align="right"|1628||
|-
|discriminated||align="right"|1628||
|-
|biassing||align="right"|1628||
|-
|enslaved||align="right"|1628||
|-
|backwaters||align="right"|1629||
|-
|palindromic||align="right"|1629||
|-
|palindromes||align="right"|1629||
|-
|tussles||align="right"|1629||
|-
|correspondents||align="right"|1630||
|-
|underrates||align="right"|1632||
|-
|underrate||align="right"|1632||
|-
|characterized||align="right"|1633||
|-
|etcher||align="right"|1634||
|-
|labium||align="right"|1634||
|-
|fluctuates||align="right"|1634||
|-
|morocco||align="right"|1634||
|-
|circumnavigated||align="right"|1634||
|-
|Anglican||align="right"|1635||
|-
|graphically||align="right"|1637||
|-
|millenniums||align="right"|1638||
|-
|domesticating||align="right"|1639||
|-
|pharmaceutical||align="right"|1640||
|-
|onus||align="right"|1640||
|-
|feints||align="right"|1644||
|-
|scavenge||align="right"|1644||
|-
|malls||align="right"|1644||
|-
|salaciously||align="right"|1645||
|-
|additional||align="right"|1646||
|-
|nonuser||align="right"|1646||
|-
|predisposing||align="right"|1646||
|-
|temperamentally||align="right"|1646||
|-
|invigorate||align="right"|1646||
|-
|protuberances||align="right"|1646||
|-
|disinclines||align="right"|1647||
|-
|castanet||align="right"|1647||
|-
|piloting||align="right"|1649||
|-
|leniently||align="right"|1652||
|-
|melange||align="right"|1653||
|-
|dialling||align="right"|1653||
|-
|naively||align="right"|1654||
|-
|siesta||align="right"|1655||
|-
|collectives||align="right"|1655||
|-
|quibbles||align="right"|1656||
|-
|dawdler||align="right"|1656||
|-
|cosmologies||align="right"|1656||
|-
|cosmology||align="right"|1656||
|-
|morbid||align="right"|1656||
|-
|inconvenienced||align="right"|1656||
|-
|numerating||align="right"|1657||
|-
|incapacitate||align="right"|1657||
|-
|overwrite||align="right"|1658||
|-
|horrendous||align="right"|1659||
|-
|tableau||align="right"|1660||
|-
|derisively||align="right"|1662||
|-
|disk||align="right"|1664||
|-
|diverging||align="right"|1665||
|-
|rotundity||align="right"|1665||
|-
|cultivators||align="right"|1665||
|-
|maroon||align="right"|1666||
|-
|stunning||align="right"|1667||
|-
|interleave||align="right"|1668||
|-
|globes||align="right"|1668||
|-
|hick||align="right"|1669||
|-
|realty||align="right"|1670||
|-
|belated||align="right"|1670||
|-
|punning||align="right"|1670||
|-
|haphazardly||align="right"|1671||
|-
|wader||align="right"|1673||
|-
|resilient||align="right"|1674||
|-
|auk||align="right"|1674||
|-
|priggish||align="right"|1676||
|-
|bungalow||align="right"|1676||
|-
|masqueraded||align="right"|1677||
|-
|configuring||align="right"|1677||
|-
|masterstroke||align="right"|1679||
|-
|yaws||align="right"|1679||
|-
|ganglions||align="right"|1681||
|-
|kidnaps||align="right"|1682||
|-
|shivery||align="right"|1683||
|-
|whaler||align="right"|1684||
|-
|bewilder||align="right"|1684||
|-
|roughshod||align="right"|1688||
|-
|bluebird||align="right"|1688||
|-
|toothbrushes||align="right"|1690||
|-
|romance||align="right"|1690||
|-
|adeptness||align="right"|1691||
|-
|dowsing||align="right"|1691||
|-
|processioned||align="right"|1691||
|-
|missioned||align="right"|1692||
|-
|vessels||align="right"|1694||
|-
|flabbiness||align="right"|1694||
|-
|penmanship||align="right"|1695||
|-
|Ojibwa||align="right"|1700||
|-
|actualized||align="right"|1701||
|-
|established||align="right"|1702||
|-
|copped||align="right"|1704||
|-
|liability||align="right"|1705||
|-
|sniggers||align="right"|1706||
|-
|dyspeptic||align="right"|1706||
|-
|crunch||align="right"|1706||
|-
|hibiscuses||align="right"|1706||
|-
|stencil||align="right"|1707||
|-
|quadruplet||align="right"|1709||
|-
|primness||align="right"|1709||
|-
|stocks||align="right"|1709||
|-
|leaseholds||align="right"|1710||
|-
|rheumatic||align="right"|1711||
|-
|papilla||align="right"|1713||
|-
|presentiments||align="right"|1714||
|-
|tantrum||align="right"|1714||
|-
|needling||align="right"|1715||
|-
|impersonating||align="right"|1715||
|-
|settees||align="right"|1716||
|-
|hustling||align="right"|1720||
|-
|unassuming||align="right"|1722||
|-
|Houyhnhnm||align="right"|1726||
|-
|knotholes||align="right"|1726||
|-
|Lilliput||align="right"|1726||
|-
|soporifics||align="right"|1727||
|-
|Shinto||align="right"|1727||
|-
|bludgeons||align="right"|1730||
|-
|pillboxes||align="right"|1730||
|-
|pantheistic||align="right"|1732||
|-
|vampires||align="right"|1732||
|-
|palaver||align="right"|1735||
|-
|Stilton||align="right"|1736||
|-
|incriminates||align="right"|1736||
|-
|philanders||align="right"|1737||
|-
|exiled||align="right"|1737||
|-
|coterie||align="right"|1738||
|-
|cantaloupe||align="right"|1739||
|-
|wham||align="right"|1739||
|-
|swipe||align="right"|1739||
|-
|icings||align="right"|1740||
|-
|segueing||align="right"|1740||
|-
|insulates||align="right"|1741||
|-
|flatiron||align="right"|1743||
|-
|uncharacteristic||align="right"|1748||
|-
|cornmeal||align="right"|1749||
|-
|develop||align="right"|1750||
|-
|spindling||align="right"|1750||
|-
|measurements||align="right"|1751||
|-
|pompon||align="right"|1751||
|-
|fanciers||align="right"|1751||
|-
|lumberyard||align="right"|1753||
|-
|riffles||align="right"|1754||
|-
|personification||align="right"|1755||
|-
|mesquites||align="right"|1759||
|-
|maniacs||align="right"|1763||
|-
|pronouncing||align="right"|1764||
|-
|frivolity||align="right"|1764||
|-
|aboriginals||align="right"|1767||
|-
|Afghans||align="right"|1767||
|-
|paws||align="right"|1769||
|-
|mynas||align="right"|1769||
|-
|modernization||align="right"|1770||
|-
|coagulants||align="right"|1770||
|-
|hairpin||align="right"|1771||
|-
|fagged||align="right"|1772||
|-
|Ta||align="right"|1772||
|-
|propertied||align="right"|1772||
|-
|fagging||align="right"|1772||
|-
|pups||align="right"|1773||
|-
|gibbon||align="right"|1774||
|-
|gecko||align="right"|1774||
|-
|passé||align="right"|1775||
|-
|clannish||align="right"|1776||
|-
|gnu||align="right"|1777||
|-
|gasses||align="right"|1779||
|-
|balalaika||align="right"|1780||
|-
|congressman||align="right"|1780||
|-
|fumigate||align="right"|1781||
|-
|varying||align="right"|1781||
|-
|minutiae||align="right"|1782||
|-
|effervesce||align="right"|1784||
|-
|bangle||align="right"|1787||
|-
|letups||align="right"|1787||
|-
|thyroids||align="right"|1787||
|-
|loots||align="right"|1788||
|-
|Hollands||align="right"|1788||
|-
|Dolly||align="right"|1790||
|-
|weakfish||align="right"|1791||
|-
|rutabagas||align="right"|1791||
|-
|equalizer||align="right"|1792||
|-
|steeplechase||align="right"|1793||
|-
|daredevils||align="right"|1794||
|-
|commentated||align="right"|1794||
|-
|embeds||align="right"|1794||
|-
|telegraphy||align="right"|1795||
|-
|soled||align="right"|1795||
|-
|allover||align="right"|1796||
|-
|titanium||align="right"|1796||
|-
|quizzically||align="right"|1797||
|-
|stashes||align="right"|1797||
|-
|kilogram||align="right"|1797||
|-
|belittled||align="right"|1797||
|-
|Mon||align="right"|1798||
|-
|bibliographies||align="right"|1802||
|-
|fezes||align="right"|1803||
|-
|dressmaking||align="right"|1803||
|-
|condoned||align="right"|1805||
|-
|coarsening||align="right"|1805||
|-
|gumbos||align="right"|1805||
|-
|peewee||align="right"|1806||
|-
|lassos||align="right"|1807||
|-
|Pueblos||align="right"|1808||
|-
|blinder||align="right"|1809||
|-
|eddied||align="right"|1810||
|-
|scurrying||align="right"|1810||
|-
|milliliter||align="right"|1810||
|-
|miffed||align="right"|1811||
|-
|quintet||align="right"|1811||
|-
|aluminum||align="right"|1812||
|-
|shawling||align="right"|1812||
|-
|tossup||align="right"|1812||
|-
|opalescent||align="right"|1813||
|-
|vocalic||align="right"|1814||
|-
|Swahili||align="right"|1814||
|-
|nocturnes||align="right"|1814||
|-
|underpaying||align="right"|1817||
|-
|diarist||align="right"|1818||
|-
|intellectualizes||align="right"|1819||
|-
|stethoscope||align="right"|1820||
|-
|bloodstain||align="right"|1820||
|-
|squawk||align="right"|1821||
|-
|suffragist||align="right"|1822||
|-
|caffeine||align="right"|1823||
|-
|flysheet||align="right"|1825||
|-
|augmented||align="right"|1825||
|-
|subway||align="right"|1825||
|-
|crotchety||align="right"|1825||
|-
|pullout||align="right"|1825||
|-
|beadier||align="right"|1826||
|-
|mammal||align="right"|1826||
|-
|chaffed||align="right"|1827||
|-
|clinics||align="right"|1827||
|-
|recruitment||align="right"|1828||
|-
|mas||align="right"|1829||
|-
|mesmerizing||align="right"|1829||
|-
|constitutionals||align="right"|1829||
|-
|cahoots||align="right"|1829||
|-
|homeopathic||align="right"|1830||
|-
|pterodactyl||align="right"|1830||
|-
|cadres||align="right"|1830||
|-
|hex||align="right"|1830||
|-
|chipmunks||align="right"|1832||
|-
|Horus||align="right"|1832||
|-
|toothpastes||align="right"|1832||
|-
|cottonmouths||align="right"|1832||
|-
|underplays||align="right"|1833||
|-
|dorsals||align="right"|1834||
|-
|cetaceans||align="right"|1835||
|-
|wholeheartedly||align="right"|1836||
|-
|creepily||align="right"|1836||
|-
|étude||align="right"|1837||
|-
|Confucianism||align="right"|1837||
|-
|scatting||align="right"|1838||
|-
|smokestacks||align="right"|1838||
|-
|pretzel||align="right"|1838||
|-
|upheaval||align="right"|1838||
|-
|Bunker||align="right"|1839||
|-
|mushier||align="right"|1839||
|-
|bushings||align="right"|1839||
|-
|OK||align="right"|1839||
|-
|mesa||align="right"|1840||
|-
|wastrel||align="right"|1841||
|-
|pyromaniac||align="right"|1842||
|-
|Assam||align="right"|1842||
|-
|Spitz||align="right"|1842||
|-
|wisteria||align="right"|1842||
|-
|cubbyhole||align="right"|1842||
|-
|kinkiest||align="right"|1844||
|-
|Limoges||align="right"|1844||
|-
|taillights||align="right"|1844||
|-
|subgroups||align="right"|1845||
|-
|garnisheeing||align="right"|1846||
|-
|Joe||align="right"|1846||
|-
|tobogganed||align="right"|1846||
|-
|snobby||align="right"|1846||
|-
|strapless||align="right"|1846||
|-
|cheekily||align="right"|1846||
|-
|orgiastic||align="right"|1846||
|-
|funnest||align="right"|1846||
|-
|tactlessness||align="right"|1847||
|-
|tailcoats||align="right"|1847||
|-
|gynecologists||align="right"|1847||
|-
|cartography||align="right"|1847||
|-
|tenderfeet||align="right"|1849||
|-
|laterals||align="right"|1851||
|-
|educations||align="right"|1851||
|-
|trunks||align="right"|1851||
|-
|hangars||align="right"|1852||
|-
|colloids||align="right"|1852||
|-
|delimits||align="right"|1852||
|-
|delimited||align="right"|1852||
|-
|davenport||align="right"|1853||
|-
|Russians||align="right"|1854||
|-
|abnormality||align="right"|1854||
|-
|rainfall||align="right"|1854||
|-
|Brewer||align="right"|1855||
|-
|hazings||align="right"|1855||
|-
|vendetta||align="right"|1855||
|-
|pullouts||align="right"|1855||
|-
|warlords||align="right"|1856||
|-
|seismographs||align="right"|1858||
|-
|interbreeding||align="right"|1859||
|-
|emulsification||align="right"|1859||
|-
|pub||align="right"|1859||
|-
|soulfulness||align="right"|1860||
|-
|Darwinian||align="right"|1860||
|-
|flautist||align="right"|1860||
|-
|pipelines||align="right"|1860||
|-
|ewe||align="right"|1861||
|-
|bellboy||align="right"|1861||
|-
|trapezes||align="right"|1861||
|-
|ewes||align="right"|1861||
|-
|railroading||align="right"|1862||
|-
|isomorphic||align="right"|1862||
|-
|canapé||align="right"|1863||
|-
|columns||align="right"|1863||
|-
|octets||align="right"|1864||
|-
|coffeecakes||align="right"|1865||
|-
|goulash||align="right"|1866||
|-
|sudsier||align="right"|1866||
|-
|maverick||align="right"|1867||
|-
|safaris||align="right"|1868||
|-
|rangier||align="right"|1868||
|-
|mailbox||align="right"|1868||
|-
|rotting||align="right"|1870||
|-
|saprophyte||align="right"|1870||
|-
|agenda||align="right"|1871||
|-
|roomers||align="right"|1871||
|-
|masterminds||align="right"|1872||
|-
|deforest||align="right"|1874||
|-
|spaghetti||align="right"|1874||
|-
|intercollegiate||align="right"|1874||
|-
|Helicon||align="right"|1875||
|-
|dermatitis||align="right"|1876||
|-
|semiprivate||align="right"|1876||
|-
|toniest||align="right"|1877||
|-
|supplies||align="right"|1878||
|-
|quirking||align="right"|1878||
|-
|wagged||align="right"|1879||
|-
|onionskin||align="right"|1879||
|-
|bacillus||align="right"|1879||
|-
|clobber||align="right"|1879||
|-
|steamrollered||align="right"|1879||
|-
|alumna||align="right"|1879||
|-
|locoweed||align="right"|1879||
|-
|toeholds||align="right"|1880||
|-
|paternalism||align="right"|1881||
|-
|adrenals||align="right"|1882||
|-
|syndicating||align="right"|1882||
|-
|winery||align="right"|1882||
|-
|interface||align="right"|1882||
|-
|infantryman||align="right"|1883||
|-
|worldlier||align="right"|1883||
|-
|shyest||align="right"|1884||
|-
|showdowns||align="right"|1884||
|-
|oilfield||align="right"|1884||
|-
|words||align="right"|1884||
|-
|fixating||align="right"|1885||
|-
|micron||align="right"|1885||
|-
|stagehand||align="right"|1885||
|-
|contraceptives||align="right"|1886||
|-
|sensitization||align="right"|1887||
|-
|parachutists||align="right"|1888||
|-
|sandblaster||align="right"|1888||
|-
|erogenous||align="right"|1889||
|-
|lactating||align="right"|1889||
|-
|psychopathics||align="right"|1890||
|-
|reactor||align="right"|1890||
|-
|unsnaps||align="right"|1892||
|-
|decolletes||align="right"|1894||
|-
|inbound||align="right"|1894||
|-
|marihuana||align="right"|1894||
|-
|encapsulated||align="right"|1894||
|-
|erythrocytes||align="right"|1894||
|-
|sequinned||align="right"|1894||
|-
|defrosted||align="right"|1895||
|-
|sacks||align="right"|1895||
|-
|phonemes||align="right"|1896||
|-
|mescaline||align="right"|1896||
|-
|ions||align="right"|1896||
|-
|midyear||align="right"|1896||
|-
|redwoods||align="right"|1897||
|-
|happenstances||align="right"|1897||
|-
|sandhog||align="right"|1897||
|-
|eggs||align="right"|1898||
|-
|taxicab||align="right"|1899||
|-
|concoction||align="right"|1675||
|}
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:49, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

: I identified several dozen words as possibly conservative. But the problem here is that a general sample does not catch enough real conservative words. Still, you might assess the centuries of my selections (I didn't look at any dates before making these selections) and we can go from there.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:36, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

::Thank you for your work! I now added the dates of the words, as found automatically at the Merriam-Webster. Here a first table:
{|class="wikitable"
!
!16s
!17s
!18s
!Σ
|-
!conservative words
|15||9||17||41
|-
!all words
|176||114||210||500
|-
!percentage of conservative words
|8.52%||7.89%||8.1%||8.2%
|}

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 11:29, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

::: That's a fascinating analysis, but its meaning is simply this: roughly 8% of all new words are conservative in nature. That is greater than the number of words I would have identified as liberal in nature.

::: But very few of these words qualified for our list, which expressly consists of the "''best''" new conservative words. Those words are being generated at a geometric rate.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:55, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

== Destruction of words ==

Andy, your model takes into account only the ''creation'' of new words. But in any living language, words fall out of use, too.

Imagine a country where a constant number of ''conservative words'' is created each year, but where these words have a half-time of 100 years, that is, e.g, only half of the words used in 1600 were still in use in 1700.

Such a country would have the same distribution of conservative words as [[Conservapedia's Law]] implies - but the overall number of conservative words becomes constant after a while...

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 10:02, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

: The conservative words are remarkably durable and long-lasting, while the liberal terms (like "population control") fall out of favor quite quickly.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:17, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

== PERFECTION: 20-40-80-160 BY CENTURY ==

For my statistical analysis, I recounted the words in the table: in fact, the
numbers in the small table of the words per century doesn't match the list of
the conservative words:

{|class="wikitable"
!century
!17th
!18th
!19th
!20th
!21st
|-
!claimed
|20||40||80||160||13
|-
!recount
|20||40||81||150||14
|}

An examination of the page's history showed that on Oct 31, 2009 this error was
introduced (with ''Segway'') - and preserved ever since.

{|class="wikitable"
!century
!17th
!18th
!19th
!20th
!21st
|-
!pre Segway
|14||28||56||112||6
|-
!post Segway
|15||28||56||124||6
|-
!my count
|15||29||57||114||6
|}

How does this confirm that ''selection bias'' is the driving force behind the [[Conservapedia's law]]? Well (ignoring the 21st century for a while), if this law holds then ~53% of the words you find should be from the 20th century, ~47% from the three earlier centuries.

But in the time from Oct 31, 2009 until Apr , 2010 when you claimed ''17-34-70-141 by century - spectacular, near-perfect geometric growth continues'', you found only 17 words from the last century, and 22 older words, that is, instead of 53% / 47% the odds of 44% / 56% !

After reaching this mile stone, your ratio rebounded...

So, you always reached your goal, though this was an arbitrary one, set by a typo. This implies that you are actively targeting a ratio, and that this ratio is independent of a actual distribution of the conservative words.

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 11:16, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

: Typos and counting errors are, of course, inevitable; your own comment above has an error in its last seven words. Errors can be found in the greatest of works, such as [[Bernard Riemann]]'s famous mathematical lecture. None of this undermines the value of Riemann's work ... or ours. The best new conservative words do double by century, and it would be nearly impossible to identify such a large number closely fitting that pattern unless the underlying pattern existed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:06, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

You are right: It´s not about typos - it's about the phenomenon I'll explain in the following section
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 10:46, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

== Too Good to be True ==

Imagine the hypothesis: There are as many male writers as there are female
ones.

To proof this hypothesis, round for round, a player '''A''' names a male author,
then a player '''B''' a female one. The round one player runs out of names - and
the other doesn't- the hypothesis is falsified. If both stop in the same round,
the hypothesis is true.

But what can be said about the validity of the hypothesis before this last
round? There are thousands and thousands of authors, what do we know when we
reach round 300?

Nothing. At least nothing about the ratio of female and male authors! In fact,
imagine the game with player '''A''' naming ''two'' male authors for each of
player '''B''''s female writer. After 300 rounds, this game is far from being
finished, but we can't conclude anything!

Unless this game is played to its end, it's just an exercise in futility.

Statistics try to find methods which allow to draw conclusions without exhausting the whole population1

So, what's another way to create data for validating or falsifying the
hypothesis? Let's think of player '''S''' who says that he will gather authors
at random - and that this list will beautifully exemplify the hypothesis.

And so it does: he gives a couple of hundred names and - lo and behold - exactly
half of them are males! He even goes a step further and says that each two
consecutive name would mirror the hypothesis.

When would you start to suspect that he is not an honest player? The probability
that a pair of authors consists from a man and a woman is 1/2. And in a random
list of names, you'll find many such pairs. But if '''S''' announces: the next
pair is gender-mixed, the one thereafter, too, and the next one, again - that's
like predicting three ''heads'' when tossing a coin three times. If he does it
ten times, you would be a fool not to think that something fishy is happening,
i.e., that the names are not taken from a random list of authors, but in fact
are chosen deliberately. His data is just ''too good to be true''!

Such a list has no more significance than the first couple of hundred names
generated by our players '''A''' and '''B'''.

Andy, I hope you see how this scenario applies to your method of generating
''best conservative new words''.

At least four times you announced the start of a new ''layer'', and each time,
you were able to complete it perfectly. Though the probability to find the
combination 1-2-4-8 for 15 words may be bigger than for each other combination,
it's at best 2.6508% . Doing this four times in a row yields odds of
1:2,000,000.

Again, your findings are just ''too good to be true'', therefore, they are not
believable, and don't support your claims made in [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law]].

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 10:46, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

: Disbelief of something because it is "too good to be true" is not a strong argument against it. Perhaps it is not precisely true as stated, but is a rough approximation, for example. Your specific arguments against the proposition above don't withstand scrutiny.

: Finding the best new conservative words is like drilling for oil. Of course it is not a random process. That would be silly. But the lack of randomness does not mean that no intelligent conclusions can be drawn. We can properly conclude that there is more oil in the Arabian Peninsula than in Pennsylvania, where oil was first discovered, despite the lack of randomness in drilling oil wells. Our conclusion would be based on the difference in output, and the implausibility that ''any'' reasonable selection technique would produce such a differential if there were not also an underlying difference.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:06, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

== A summary with graphs... ==

On June 9, 2009, Andrew Schlafly proclaimed his [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law]]: <blockquote>'''Conservapedia's Law''' ''is the observation that conservative insights increase over time at a geometric rate, as in 1-2-4-8-16-etc. 
''For example, there is a doubling in effective new conservative terms per century. </blockquote> This remarkable precise observation was bolstered over the time by a list of 300 ''conservative words''
<blockquote>''Powerful, insightful new conservative terms have grown at a geometric rate, roughly doubling every century. For every insightful new conservative term originating in the 1600s, there are two new terms originating in the 1700s, four new terms in the 1800s, and eight new terms in the 1900s, for a pattern of "1-2-4-8". This implies a more conservative future and a correlation between conservatism and truth. The year 1612 is our starting point: the King James Version of the Bible was published in 1611, and William Shakespeare had written nearly all his plays. ''</blockquote>

{|
|The pic on the right shows the percentage of terms per century in which they were first mentioned.
|[[File:Bcw-001.png|thumb|Best Conservative New Words]]
|-
|The distribution of these ''conservative words'' is even more remarkable as it doesn't reflect the general trends of creating new words. To exemplify this, I took a sample of ≈ 42,000 words from the word-book of my ubuntu-distribution and checked their creation date with the Merriam-Webster (the gray areas of the two diagrams overlap)
|[[File:Bcw-002.png|thumb|distribution of 42,000 words]]
|-
|To convince Andy Schlafly's that the distribution of the words in his list is just an artifact generated by [[sample bias]], I at first showed that it doesn't hold for shorter periods of time than centuries. But Andy Schlafly told me that he didn't see ''any merit'' in my challenge: ''The entry observes that new terms are generated at higher rates during productive periods within decades, for example just after or during religious awakenings.''
|[[File:Bcw-003.png|thumb|Cons. Words per Decade]]
|-
|Interestingly, I couldn't observe any effect of the ''Great Religious Awakenings'', neither in the number of ''conservative words'' nor in the number of all words.
|[[Image:Bcw-004.png|thumb|All Words per Decade]]
|}
No methodology is given how the ''conservative words'' are detected and gathered. To put the whole thing on a sounder ground, I asked Andrew Schlafly to take an unbiased text: I gave him a list of 500 words, which were - according to the [[Merriam Webster]] - first mentioned between 1600 and 1999. Andrew Schlafly objected to this sample as newer words are not well represented in word-books. When I propelled a second sample, consisting of 500 words all originated between 1600 and 1899 (300 years should be enough to prove his law), he was willing to mark the words he things to be conservative.

I'm very grateful that Andrew Schlafly took part in my little experiment: Thank you!

{|
|The five hundred words were taken at random from the suitable subset of the 42,000 words which I had dated, and so the sample distribution matches the overall distribution
|[[File:Bcw-005.png|thumb|500 Words per Centuries]]
|-
|Andrew Schlafly identified 41 words (8.2%) as conservative. The distribution of these 41 words over the centuries does not show a geometric progression.
|[[Image:Bcw-006.png|thumb|Identified as Conservative]]
|-
|In fact, their distribution mirrors the distribution of the whole sample, as each century ≈ 8% of the words are identified as ''conservative''
|[[File:Bcw-007.png|thumb|Percentages]]
|-
|This linearly dependence can be found for shorter periods of time (here for steps of 20 years) - and is found to be statistically significant.
|[[File:Bcw-008.png|thumb|Periods of 20 years]]
|-
|A striking contrast to this is the absence of any connection between Andrew Schlafly's list of over 300 conservative words, and a general distribution of the creation of words.
|[[File:Bcw-009.png|thumb|Periods of 20 years]]
|-
|However, if one maps the percentage of words in - e.g. - a 20 years' period in the corresponding century (24% of all 20th-century word are from the 1900s, 18% from the 1920s, 26% from the 1940s, and so forth...), one finds again a positive correlation.
|[[File:Bcw-010.png|thumb|percentages over 20 years]]
|}

Andrew Schlafly explains the discrepancies as follows:<blockquote>That's a
fascinating analysis, but its meaning is simply this: roughly 8% of all new
words are conservative in nature. That is greater than the number of words I
would have identified as liberal in nature. But very few of these words
qualified for our list, which expressly consists of the "best" new conservative
words. Those words are being generated at a geometric rate.--Andy Schlafly
11:55, 28 July 2010 (EDT) </blockquote>

I've to take exception to this: Andrew Schlafly has shown that he is able to
generate candidates for his list for any time period as it is needed to fit his
prediction. He could as easily make a list following a 1-3-9-27 (or 2-3-5-7-11)
pattern.

Even a claim like: ''the number of Best New Conservative Words'' is not corroborated in any way by the list of the [[Essay:Best New Conservative Words]], and the geometric progressions seems to be just the approximation of a phantasy.

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 13:23, 3 August 2010 (EDT)

:Ron, your quantity of commentary is impressive and your graphs (the ones that show up) are informative. But quantity is no substitute or quality. You never addressed my point above about how finding the ''best'' conservative words is like drilling for oil. Even if the same percentage of drills in Pennsylvania struck oil as in the Arabian Peninsula, that would not mean that both regions are equal for drilling for oil. Much better wells can be found in the Arabian Peninsula, and that's what this analysis is all about. Those good Arabian wells cannot be found in Pennsylvania, even though oil was first discovered there.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:04, 3 August 2010 (EDT)

::*''Ron, your quantity of commentary is impressive and your graphs (the ones that show up) are informative.'' Thanks. BTW, all the graphs are in Conservapedia's database - you can get directly to the missing two [http://conservapedia.com/images/d/d1/Bcw-003.png bcw-003.png] and [http://conservapedia.com/images/a/a0/Bcw-004.png bcw-004.png]. It seems that the thumbs and the previews weren't produced correctly - maybe a glitch in your software to which you want attend?
::*''But quantity is no substitute or quality.'' You mad a couple of quantifiable claims (''1-2-4-8 pattern''), so a quantitative analysis is what you get. You may rest assured that the quality of my information is good, too, and the math behind the analysis is sound: It's just basic statistics done with R.
::*''You never addressed my point above about how finding the best conservative words is like drilling for oil. '' As far as metaphors go, this isn't such a bad one: Imagine four oil fields. If you put one, two, four and eight wells on them, you get oil out of them according to your geometric progression. This works as long as there is enough oils in the fields, but you can say something about the amount of oil in the fields at first when they start getting dry. The English language is very rich, it seems that 8% of its words are conservative, so there should be an abundance even of ''best conservative words''. Until you have sucked a century dry, you cannot say anything about the distribution of the ''best conservative words''.

::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 08:14, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

One way of marrying the two ideas above (that there is no increase of conservative terms over time and that there is an increase in the "best" conservative terms over time) is simply to suggest that conservative terms are getting better in quality and not quantity, which is the point that Mr. Schlafly makes, I believe. An explanation that might want to be considered is that after a new term is coined, it may slowly lose its relevence over time. I would suggest that if you look at the vocabulary from the 17th century, many words have lost their relevence greatly. This presumably applies to conservative terms as well. So, a partial explanation for conservative terms increasing in "quality" over time may be the decrease in time-lag and thus an increase in relevence.--[[User:GrahamB|GrahamB]] 12:15, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

== Decrypt ==

Can I challenge 'decrypt' as a conservative word? Take the greatest decryption exercise in history, the breaking of the German Enigma code in World War 2 by British and Polish cryptographers. Alan Turing, who made the crucial breakthrough, was homosexual. Several others involved may have been communist sympathisers. The great majority were recruited from either the civil service (= Big Government) or universities (= Professor Values) and returned to those professions when WW2 was over. Bottom line: not a very conservative bunch. (Check [http://www.bletchleypark.org.uk the Bletchley Park website].) [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 18:05, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

: Beware of [[liberal]] revisionism, where historians try to give credit to liberals for achievements no matter how unjustified. It was Polish mathematicians who decrypted the enigma, not an Englishman. The British are notoriously weak in mathematics.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:11, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

:: Andy, you don't seem to know so much about the decoding of Enigma. I gave you the reference to the Bletchley Park website so you can read about it there. The main contributions from the Poles were (1) stealing a German Enigma machine, (2) working out how Enigma encoded messages, (3) getting the Enigma machine to the Brits and (4) proposing a method for automated decoding of ciphers (the "Bombe"). The bombes that were eventually built were constructed by British engineers and used some principles but not the details of the Polish mathematicians' idea. Pretty much everything else was done by the British, including the first decipherment of Enigma, the second decipherment when the German Navy introduced a more sophisticated code, and the building of Colussus, the world's first programmable electronic computer, which played an essential role in decoding the later, more complex Enigma codes used by the U-boat fleet. Turing's role was crucial (that ain't liberal revisionism - go on, read about it). Some Poles who'd escaped to England did indeed work with the British but it just ain't true that they decoded Enigma.
:: As for "the British are notoriously weak in math": you're having a laugh, as my British colleagues would say. [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 19:47, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

::: Benjy, British liberals famously support and credit each other, often undeservedly so. If you find a great British mathematician who ranks with the best in the world, please do tell us who he is!

::: As to decoding the Enigma, perhaps the Brits did some machinery to help, but the mathematicians who provided the brainpower were Poles.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:14, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

:::: Sir Isaac Newton was a British liberal (he was a non-standard Christian that wrote extensively on the occult) who was the first to scientifically describe gravity and his 1687 publication ''Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica'' is considered the seminal work in classical mechanics. The top physicists in the world consider Newton one of the two greatest physicists in history, and his name is still used in science today, for example, "a non-Newtonian fluid". He may also have been homosexual, conisdering he was largely sexless in an age where homosexuality could get you burned at the stake. [[User:JohnQP|JohnQP]] 21:44, 5 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::Brilliant logic. 17th century tabloids tell us little of the women in Newton's life, therefore, there must not have been any. As for his writings on the occult, perhaps your referring to his beliefs that some tales in Ovid's Metamorpheses were inspired by physical fact? If I recall, he was proved right in this regard, when he demonstrated that the chemicals which corresponding to classical elements ascribed to certain mythological figures actually, in one case, produced a cracking purple "web-like" effect when combined - just as in Ovid's story. I'd hardly call this un-Christian, especially since he also used translating the Bible as inspiration for much of his work. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]][[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]] 21:50, 5 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::I must agree with you, JacobB. This is nothing other than rank liberal revisionism of the highest order. Slandering the good name of such a noble Christian is just plainly offensive. --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 21:54, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

''" If you find a great British mathematician who ranks with the best in the world, please do tell us who he is!"'' - Here is a small list of some whom I would consider to rank with the world's best (in no particular order):
* Sir Isaac Newton
* Charles Babbage
* Alan Turing
* G.H. Hardy
* Bertrand Russell
* Roger Penrose
* Andrew Wiles
* Arthur Cayley
* William Rowan Hamilton
* George Boole
* Augustus De Morgan
Whilst I agree that Polish mathematicians played an important role in cracking the Enigma code, but to jump from that to saying that not only are there no great British mathematicians, but that also Brits are 'notoriously weak' at maths - is clearly unfair and incorrect. [[User:FionaN|FionaN]] 07:40, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

: While I am respectful of the contributions of those on your list, as a group they are a far cry from the greatest mathematicians and many would not be considered "British". Hamilton was Irish, for example, and Newton was pre-modern and pre-Britain. Wiles did his work in the U.S. Russell's work was deflated by Godel, and others on the list don't even come close to being great mathematicians.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:21, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

:: Fiona seems to miss the varying degrees of "mathematician", "great mathematician", and "one of the greatest mathematicians" as if they're all the same thing. We saw the same thing when another contributor was unable to grasp the difference between "conservative words" and "best conservative words". It's as if liberals can see everything in the world only in black and white terms, as if everything falls perfectly into one of two categories, e.g. "mathematician" and "not-mathematician". I think this is another example of [[Liberal Inability To Abstract]]. [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 14:42, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

Andy, you stated: "It was Polish mathematicians who decrypted the enigma, not an Englishman" and "The British are notoriously weak in mathematics". Both these statements are not only untrue but ridiculous. I've tried to contribute to this encyclopedia but I'm not going to waste my time messing around if you fill it up with your own uninformed prejudices, refuse to do some easy reading to check your facts, and get absurdly defensive when your statements are corrected by people who are more knowledgeable on the subject in question. ''Laziness is not a conservative character trait, least of all intellectual laziness.'' Please tell me if you're going to check your facts before shooting your mouth off in future, in which case I'd be pleased to continue contributing to CP. [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 15:40, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

: Benjy, please rant somewhere else instead. We tell the truth here, whether [[Anglophile]]s accept it or not. The relative weakness of [[Britain]] in mathematics is an objective fact.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:44, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::Have you any proof for your assertion? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 16:37, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::(EC) Hi Andy. Are you talking about mathematical ability in the general UK population, or about the number of major contributions to the field by British mathematicians? Thanks, --[[User:JoanZ|JoanZ]] 16:48, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

:::(EC) Look at any list of the greatest mathematicians of the past 200 and count how many were from Britain. Or list the greatest modern mathematical achievements and count how many came out of Britain. I'm sorry liberals don't teach this, and that's why there is a need for Conservapedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:50, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::::According to [http://fabpedigree.com/james/mathmen.htm this blog], 9 of 99 were British - and that's an all time, Ancient Greece to present list. Now you; would you care to support your position with sources? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:05, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::And ''your source'' comes from a ''blog?'' How about you, SamI, come up with non-blog, official sources yourself to support ''your'' position. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:16, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::Rather a blog than my own imagination. Would Andy care to provide his sources? The burden of proof, and all that. [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:21, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::(EC)[http://www.sci.hkbu.edu.hk/scilab/math/math.html This list gives 3 British and 1 Irish out of 14.] And why do I keep having to fill out captcha boxes? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:25, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::Andy said "Look at '''any''' list" (my emphasis). This is a list already on the Internet so SamI is just following Andy's advice. Please note that there are '''no''' people on that list who were born in the U.S.A. [[User:GeoffA|GeoffA]] 17:23, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::Guess what...you, SamI, just accused Andy of using his own imagination, and since you, GeoffA, is supportive of Sam's statement, both of you are going to get official sources to support your side, otherwise I'm going to assume you are using your own imaginations just to troll here. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:31, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::::I would say that the second source I posted above is fairly official. And why do we need to support our side, but Andy doesn't have to support his beyond saying 'oh, it's an objective fact'? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:39, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::How about the [[Fields Medal]] as a rough proxy? I count six awarded to UK mathematicians out of a total of 48 (12.5%), compared to thirteen awarded to Americans (~27%). Not bad for a small island. --[[User:JoanZ|JoanZ]] 17:27, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::::: Well there you go "Karajou". Since the USA has a population ~5 times larger than the UK, it looks like the UK is doing pretty well. And don't you think Andy can talk for himself without you leaping to his side? What are '''your''' sources to support his statement? [[User:GeoffA|GeoffA]] 17:36, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::There are better ways to prove us wrong then by coming here and making demands; one of those ways is to provide a reasonable explanation which supports your position, backed up by valid sources, and being polite about the whole thing. See ya in a couple hours. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:44, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

(outdent) Well I used the two "ours" you gave me to find some sources.

How about this [http://www.virtualimage.co.uk/html/great_mathematicians.html commercial source]? Of the 20 mathematiciams, John Napier, Ada Lovelace, Lewis Carroll, Alan Turing and William Oughtred are British. That's 25%. No Americans.

Or how about [http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2010/apr/11/the-10-best-mathematicians this] article listing a top 10? 1 Brit - no Americans.

The Scientific Computing Laboratory at Hong Kong Baptist University [http://www.sci.hkbu.edu.hk/scilab/math/math.html lists] four Brits out of 14. Yes - Christains disagree with you too.

Another blog (I know you don't like them, but surely the "Best of the Public" is always right? Your boss thinks so) [http://kaushal42.blogspot.com/2008/01/twenty-five-greatest-mathematicians-of.html here] has two Brits out of 25. No Americans.

Centre College [http://web.centre.edu/mat/century.html lists] 24 for last century alone. Four Brits and Five Yanks. That's still not bad for such a poor, small, atheistic island.

Lastly, in the magazine Mathematics Teacher (I.7. Vol.55, 1962), W.C. Eells [http://afrodita.rcub.bg.ac.rs/~flora/100.html published] a list of the 100 greatest mathematicians of all time. I'm not going to go through all 100, but Newton, Napier, Wallis, Hamilton, Barrow, Taylor, Briggs, Babbage, Smith, H.J.S., Cotes, Boole, Halley and Lord Kelvin were all Brits. That's 13/100.

So. There are your sources. I note that SamI can't respond because TK blocked him/her. Since I fully expect the same fate to befall me after this post for having proved you wrong, I'll say goodbye now. I suppose it's unrealistic to expect you or Andy to provide sources to back up ''your'' point of view. [[User:GeoffA|GeoffA]] 19:43, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:Granted, GeoffA, I would agree with your point that we should provide sources to back up our point of view. But we're not going to do it for someone on demand. And there lies the end of the lesson. Hope you learned something about tact. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 21:05, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

*Is there something in the water over there in the U.K., or is it your atheism? Perhaps its the generally gloomy economic picture and remnants of the class system that make you as you are! Godspeed to all of you. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 17:38, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

Brits, we're talking about '''''mathematicians''''' in this thread. Do you know what a mathematician is? That's not a physicist (Penrose), a computer geek (Lovelace, Babbage, Turing), or a political hack (Russell). One more tip: the Irish (Hamilton) do not consider themselves to be British.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:25, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

*''Newton was pre-modern and pre-Britain'': The [[Oxford calculators]] were pre-modern, but English. [[John Napier]] or [[Richard Recorde]] where Scottish or Welsh - though they weren't English, they were inhabitants of the British Isles, and therefore British in the same sense as most Haitians are Hispaniolians as well. Both are modern mathematicians - in the usual sense of the word ''"modern"'' when talking about periods of history. You may describe them as ''early modern''. Sir Isaac Newton - who lived even later - was e a modern mathematician, too. And as a subject of Queen Anne of Great Britain, he was most certainly British.
*''Do you know what a mathematician is? '' A mathematician is someone who contributes to the field of mathematics. Mathematicians are not squeamish: you could be covered with green fur and be a baker - if you solve an open Hilbert problem, they will you love you, and count you as a mathematician. Penrose, Lovelace, Babbage, Turing and Russell were great mathematicians, even if they were part-time physicists, geeks or hacks. {{unsigned|RonLar}}

:: Additionally, the overlap between mathematics and physics is huge - especially applied mathematics. Sophie Germain, a ''woman'' mathematician who appears on several of those lists, contributed a huge amount of work to the subject of elastics, and her work was used extensively, for instance in the construction of the Eiffel Tower. She is universally considered to be a mathematician, but you would apparently describe her as a physicist or even an architect. Russell was deeply involved in the Hilbert Program, which though ultimately unsuccessful provided modern mathematics with a solid framework. His work ''Principia Mathematica'' is one of the most important works on the subject.

:: I cannot understand why you have such a closed mind on this subject. You have plenty of evidence that contradicts your opinion, so it's now only fair that you present evidence to support your hypothesis or at least consider revising it.

:: Please note, that I am not claiming that Britain is the pre-eminent country for producing mathematicians. Germany would probably win that prize across modern history, and if you take the last 50 years or so, it's probably the U.S.A. (although I have no hard evidence for that statement). I merely take issue with your statement that "The British are notoriously weak in mathematics". [[User:GeoffA|GeoffA]] 08:43, 7 August 2010 (EDT)

== General reply to Brits, if any, who commented above ==

The [[Brits]] who protest so stridently illustrate to me the problem of [[Anglophilia]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:22, 7 August 2010 (EDT)

:"curiouser and curiouser" - for me, it looks as the [[Anglophobe]]s are justignoring the evidence:

:{|class="wikitable"
!colspan="3"|Field Medalists by Country
|-
!country
!#
!medalist
|-
!USA
|align="right"|13 ||Jesse Douglas, John Milnor, Paul Joseph Cohen, Stephen Smale, John G. Thompson, Charles Fefferman, Daniel Quillen, William Thurston, Shing-Tung Yau, Michael Freedman, Edward Witten, Curtis T. McMullen, David Mumford
|-
!France
|align="right"|9||Laurent Schwartz, Jean-Pierre Serre, René Thom, Alexander Grothendieck, Alain Connes, Pierre-Louis Lions, Jean-Christophe Yoccoz, Laurent Lafforgue, Wendelin Werner
|-
!Soviet Union/Russia
|align="right"|8||Sergei Novikov, Grigory Margulis, Vladimir Drinfel'd, Efim Zelmanov, Maxim Kontsevich, Vladimir Voevodsky, Andrei Okounkov, (Grigori Perelman)
|-
!UK
|align="right"|6||Klaus Roth, Michael Atiyah, Alan Baker, Simon Donaldson, Richard Borcherds, Timothy Gowers
|-
!Japan
|align="right"|3||Kunihiko Kodaira, Heisuke Hironaka, Shigefumi Mori
|-
!Belgium
|align="right"|2||Pierre Deligne, Jean Bourgain
|-
!Finland
|align="right"|1||Lars Ahlfors
|-
!Norway
|align="right"|1||Atle Selberg
|-
!Sweden
|align="right"|1||Lars Hörmander
|-
!Italy
|align="right"|1||Enrico Bombieri
|-
!Germany
|align="right"|1||Gerd Faltings
|-
!New Zealand
|align="right"|1||Vaughan F. R. Jones
|-
!Australia
|align="right"|1||Terence Tao
|}

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 15:04, 9 August 2010 (EDT)

:Klaus Roth was Prussian. Michael Atiyah is Sudanese/Egyptian. Simon Donaldson does his work in ''four-dimensions'' when this world obviously only has ''three''. I imagine if I made up the math as I went, I could get a Fields medal as well? And Richard Borcherds is from South Africa.
:So spectacularly, you provide ''maybe'' two candidates for British mathematicians. Hardly impressive, considering ''Finland'' managed to get one. And who cares about this "Field's Medal" anyways? It's just some award experts give to each other to make each other feel better, and exclude the best of the public. --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 20:07, 9 August 2010 (EDT)
::For the record, "Cathy," the cobordism work of Donaldson was not only essential to the classification theorems which have revolutionized modern topology, but also have important applications in quantum mechanics and other fields that deal with "this world." For somebody who apparently has such extensive knowledge in the history of 20th century mathematics, you are certainly lacking in understanding if you believe Donaldson "made up the math as he went." As for the Fields medal (no apostrophe) being something that the best of the public are excluded from, you should be aware that best of the public exemplar Gregori Perelman was OFFERED a Fields medal and turned it down.
::Before you continue your pattern of jumping into talk page arguments with on-the-spot research, I suggest you make significant and substantive edits to our mainspace articles.[[User:JacobB|JacobB]][[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]] 20:38, 9 August 2010 (EDT)

Essay:Best New Conservative Words

2010-08-19T03:14:08Z

ChrisGT90:

[[Image:Tax-spend.jpg|thumb|480px|The "tax-and-spend" slogan stuck to Harry Hopkins like a well-fitted suit.]]Each year the English language develops about a thousand new words. The [[King James Version]] of the [[Bible]] contains only about 8,000 different words,<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8013859.stm</ref> and many good words have developed since then.

[[Conservative]] terms, which express [[conservative insights]], are being generated at a faster rate, and with much higher quality, than [[liberal]] terms are. This implies an inevitable conservative triumph over liberalism.

Powerful, insightful new conservative terms have grown at a [[geometric progression|geometric rate]], roughly doubling every century. For every insightful new conservative term originating in the 1600s, there are two new terms originating in the 1700s, four new terms in the 1800s, and eight new terms in the 1900s, for a pattern of "1-2-4-8". This implies a more conservative future and a correlation between conservatism and truth. The year 1612 is our starting point: the King James Version of the Bible was published in 1611, and [[William Shakespeare]] had written nearly all his plays.

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Century
!# New Conservative Terms
!Most Prolific Periods
|-
|1600s
|20
|period following publication of [[KJV]]
|-
|1700s
|40
|[[Great Awakening|Great Awaken.]], [[American Revolution|Am. Revol.]], [[Constitutional Convention|Const. Conv.]]
|-
|1800s
|80
|1820s - political transition and conflict
|-
|1900s
|160
|1940s - [[World War II|WWII]] and postwar transition
|-
|2000s
|14 (preliminary)
|
|-
|}

==Conservative words and terms==

{{clear}}
{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!New Term
!Origin date
!Comments
|-
|[[accountability]]
|1794
|
|-
|[[action-at-a-distance]]
|1693
|[[Newton]]'s acceptance of this concept -- which became fundamental to [[electrostatics]] and [[quantum mechanics]] and has a basis in Christianity<ref>''See, e.g.'', [[Jesus]]'s cure of the centurion's slave.</ref> -- was central to the development of his theory of gravity.<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/newton-philosophy/#ActDis</ref> Einstein criticized this concept as "spooky".
|-
|activism
|1915
|this differentiates conservatives from inactive people; this term might have originated in connection with [[Prohibition]] and efforts to pass the [[Eighteenth Amendment]]
|-
|aerobics
|1967
|invented by the Christian Dr. Kenneth H. Cooper<ref>http://www.christianadvice.net/famous_christians.htm</ref> to describe his self-help, revolutionary program to improve health, he entitled his ground-breaking book in 1968 ''Aerobics''.
|-
|alarmism
|1867
|needless warnings, as in the politically motivated claims of [[global warming]]
|-
|alcoholism
|1860
|excessive or addictive drinking of alcohol
|-
|algorithm
|1894
|an efficient and consistent step-by-step methodology for achieving a goal, the opposite of [[liberal style]]
|-
|altruism
|1853
|selfless assistance of others; this also occurs in the animal kingdom, and is a [[counterexample to evolution]]
|-
|ambulance chaser
|1896
|a lawyer who searches for victims to persuade them to sue for his profit
|-
|[[American dream]]
|1911<ref>1911 is the date given by the "OED", which refers to the Oxford English Dictionary. The Merriam-Webster dictionary gives a date of 1931.</ref>
|the idea that one’s work should be rewarding.
|-
|American Way
|1930s
|later conservative entrepreneurs used this to coin a new name for what became a highly successful and uniquely American business model: "Amway"
|-
|[[anti-Christian]]
|1900s
|Ten million sites turn up in a Google search, yet the Merriam-Webster dictionary doesn't recognize this important term.
|-
|anticompetitive
|1952
|interfering with open competition and the enormous benefits that flow from it
|-
|antilife
|1929
|critical term describing a tendency to oppose life and lifesaving care
|-
|apple pie
|1780
|honesty, simplicity, wholesomeness. Relating to, or characterized by traditionally American values. <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apple%20pie Merriam-webster- Apple pie]</ref>
|-
|assimilate
|1880s<ref>estimate only; this originated sometime in the late 1880s.</ref>
|the desired absorption of immigrant groups into the culture and mores of the resident population
|-
|attention span
|1934
|correlated with intelligence, the attention span is how long someone can concentrate on something. It is rapidly shortening; the Lincoln-Douglas debates 150 years ago lasted for hours, but none do today.<ref>http://www.help4teachers.com/ras.htm</ref> The average length of sentences in speech is another indication of attention span, and it has been shortening significantly.
|-
|baby boom
|1941
|an increase in birthrate, which is a good thing; note that the baby boom actually started before World War II, contrary to what textbooks teach.
|-
|[[bailout]]
|1951
|wasting taxpayer money to rescue, temporarily, a failing company
|-
|bedrock
|1840-1850
|an American term for unbroken solid rock underneath fragments or soil, which adopted the figurative meaning of strong values: "bedrock principles"<ref>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bedrock</ref>
|-
|beltway mentality
|1986
|popularized by [[Paul Weyrich]] though possibly first used by then-Governor [[John Sununu]] ("captives of yourselves"), it refers to a governing style that sees only as far as the highway that surrounds its capital, especially the one around D.C.
|-
|biased
|1649
|
|-
|Big Brother
|1949
|government constantly watching its citizens; [[George Orwell]] first coined this term in his classic, ''[[1984]]''
|-
|Blame America Crowd<ref>Or "Blame-America-First Crowd"</ref>
|1984
|Michael Barone quoted [[Jeane Kirkpatrick]] as saying that the "San Francisco Democrats" (site of the Democratic National Convention in 1984) "always blame America first."<ref>http://www.creators.com/opinion/michael-barone/the-blame-america-first-crowd.html</ref>
|-
|blank check
|1884
|irresponsibly giving someone unlimited spending authority or power, as in "a Con Con would be a blank check to destroy the nation"
|-
|[[Blue Dog Democrat]]
|1995
|a person who adheres to conservative principles within the Democratic party, once called a Boll Weevil; as of 2009 there are 45-50 Blue Dog Democrats in the [[House of Representatives]], which is enough to form a majority with [[Republicans]]
|-
|boondoggle
|1935
|"popularized during the [[New Deal]] as a contemptuous word for make-work projects for the unemployed." <ref>http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=boondoggle&searchmode=none</ref> The term gained popularity in [[Canada]] following a corruption scandal tied to the [[Liberal]] government in 2000.
|-
|bootstrap
|1913
|unaided effort, personal merit, hard work
|-
|bork
|1988
|coined by William Safire to refer to how Democrats savage a conservative nominee, such as their defeat of Supreme Court nominee [[Robert H. Bork]].
|-
|born-again
|1961
|it takes an open mind and heart
|-
|brainstorm
|1894
|a burst of productive thought
|-
|brainwashing
|1950
|derived from the Chinese term "xǐnǎo" soon after the [[communist]] takeover of China, "brainwashing" means forced abandonment of [[faith]] in favor of regimented [[atheism]]. In a more general sense, it refers to the manipulation and control of the human mind through torture and propaganda techniques.
|-
|brinkmanship
|1956
|the art of displaying a willingness to use military force in order to obtain a just resolution to a conflict between nations
|-
|[[bureaucracy]]
|1818
|
|-
|busywork
|1910
|meaningless activity under the pretense of accomplishing something
|-
|can-do
|1903 <ref> according to the Oxford English Dictionary. [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/can-do Miram-webster] gives the date of 1945 </ref>
|Phrase coined in a short story by [[Rudyard Kipling]] that has come to refer to an attitude that espouses individual ability and responsibility and not reliance on [[entitlements]]
|-
|[[capitalism]]
|1850-1855
|creating jobs and wealth based on a private invention, ownership and investments rather than state-controlled resources
|-
|[[carpetbagger]]
|1868
|a politician who moves to a new area to be elected to a government position, as in [[Hillary Clinton]] moving to [[New York]] to become a U.S. Senator
|-
|catharsis
|1775
|facilitating forgiveness and spiritual renewal by expression, as in writing or teaching or confession
|-
|caucus
|1763
|citizens or representatives gathering to meet and reach political decisions as a group while harnessing aspects of the [[best of the public]]; a favorite term of President John Adams, who wrote the Massachusetts Constitution and played a role in developing the [[Declaration of Independence]]
|-
|chaperone
|1720
|care and well-being of youths overseen by adults
|-
|citizen's arrest
|1941
|private enforcement of the law without the need of a taxpayer-funded police officer
|-
|civil defense
|1939
|civilians protecting themselves and their community against attack or natural disasters
|-
|claptrap
|1799
|pretentious, verbose, and often liberal nonsense; example usage: "the professor wasted the rest of the class on his liberal claptrap"
|-
|closed shop
|1904
|a business that requires membership in a union as a condition of working there; 22 conservative states prohibit this
|-
|[[Coase theorem|Coasean]]
|1980s
|an efficient result or bargain based on market forces without the distortions caused by [[transaction costs]]
|-
|Columbian
|1757
|relating to Christopher Columbus ''or the United States''
|-
|Cold War
|1947
|recognition that communist nations were at war with American freedom even in the absence of actual military conflict
|-
|competitive
|1829
|
|-
|Con Con
|1980s
|popularized by [[Phyllis Schlafly]] to highlight the deception and risks inherent in proposed national constitutional conventions
|-
|conservation of charge
|1949
|overall charge does not change in an isolated system; it is neither created nor destroyed; the concept was first suggested by [[Benjamin Franklin]] but the date of origin for this term is surprisingly recent
|-
|[[conservative]]
|1831
|
|-
|[[conservative field]]
|1870s?
|a type of physical force over a region such that items moving throughout the region can store energy ''without loss'', as in the planetary system and electrical products<ref>The mathematical definition of a conservative field -- which arises in [[multivariable calculus]] -- is that a scalar potential exists for the function and, alternatively, it is [[irrotational]].</ref>
|-
|constant
|1832
|(noun) something unchanging in value
|-
|constitutionality
|1787
|its date of origin is the year of the [[Constitutional Convention]] that proposed the [[U.S. Constitution]]
|-
|coolant
|1926
|a fluid, typically water, that facilitates efficient energy production, especially nuclear energy to cool a reactor and slow down the fission of neutrons
|-
|copacetic
|1890s<ref>Merriam-Webster officially lists its date of origin as 1919 and its source as unknown, but that is well after when Robinson says he developed it.</ref>
|Bill “Bojangles” Robinson, tap dancer extraordinaire, claimed the invention of this word; it was first popularized by African Americans
|-
|copyright
|1735
|extending private property to protect expressive works
|-
|correlate
|1742
|(verb) to show that one thing relates to another, such as [[atheism]] or [[homosexuality]] and selfishness or lack of charity; [[liberal]]s falsely rely on anecdotes to deny the general relationship
|-
|[[countability (Mathematics)|countability]]
|1874
|[[Georg Cantor]], loathed by the leading contemporary [[mathematicians]], developed this in proving that the real numbers are ''uncountable''
|-
|counterexample
|1957
|an example that is contrary to the proposition. A common point in logical, reasoned debate.
|-
|crackpot
|1884
|crazy talk, lunacy, a person on the fringe of reality
|-
|[[creation science]]
|1970s
|a term coined by the anti-[[evolution|evolutionist]] [[Henry Morris]].<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/28/AR2006022801716.html</ref>
|-
|cross-examination
|1824
|the most effective tool against [[liberal]] [[deceit]], better than even the requirement of an oath
|-
|crystal clear
|1815
|liberals are the opposite
|-
|[[culture war]]
|1991
|widespread use after the book ''Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America'' by James Davison Hunter
|-
|cyberbullying
|2000s
|a type of obnoxious and hurtful liberal behavior on the internet
|-
|[[deadweight loss]]
|1930s<ref>Confirmation of the first use is desired.</ref>
|the loss in overall wealth and efficiency imposed by monopolies and taxation, due to the loss in extra value that someone would have received beyond what he would have paid for a good at a free market price
|-
|death tax
|1989
|interestingly, the term was coined by Canadians opposed to the high estate tax on their assets held in the United States; Frank Luntz is credited with later popularizing this term in the United States.<ref>''See'' Dr. Frank Luntz, ''Words That Work: It's Not What You Say, It's What People Hear''</ref>
|-
|decentralization
|1846
|the dispersion of power, as in a shift from national to local control
|-
|decrypt
|1935
|military code-breaking, which played an instrumental role in World War II in deciphering enemy codes that many felt were unbreakable; illustrates the "can do" approach of conservatism in a patriotic way
|-
|[[defeatism]]
|1918
|a negative attitude that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy
|-
|deflation
|1891
|an increase in the value of savings
|-
|defund
|1948
|refers especially to termination of government funding of a wasteful or hurtful program
|-
|deliberative assembly
|1774<ref>''Introduction to Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised'' (19th Ed. 2000), xxv.</ref>
|used by Edmund Burke in describing the British parliament during a speech to voters in Bristol; he meant a body of persons meeting to discuss and decide common action under parliamentary law
|-
|demagogue
|1648
|
|-
|[[deregulation]]
|1963
|Reagan won in 1980 by campaigning on this.
|-
|design by committee
|before 1958
|pejorative term directed against collective production by a group
|-
|despotism
|1727
|a ruler with unlimited powers
|-
|[[deterrence]]
|1861
|
|-
|devalue
|1918
|describing an unwelcome attitude or act, as in "devaluing human life"
|-
|devotee
|1645
|ardent follower, supporter, or loyalty to. 56 years separates devotee and devoted
|-
|disinformation
|1950s
|false information spread (and sometimes manufactured) by groups with a strong political agenda
|-
|division of labor
|1776
|increasing productivity through specialization of labor, as in a husband working in manufacturing while his wife cares for children
|-
|domino effect
|1966
|how the fall of one nation to communism can result in its harmful spread to neighboring nations
|-
|double standard
|1894
|applying harsher criticism against one group, such as churchgoers or conservatives, than against another group, such as atheists or liberals; recognition of a double standard by the [[Prodigal Son]] led him to repent and convert
|-
|doublethink
|1949
|a term first coined by [[George Orwell]] in his dystopian novel ''[[1984]]''; it means simultaneously holding contradictory beliefs, which is a characteristic of [[status worship]]
|-
|doubting Thomas
|1883
|someone who believes only what he can see and touch, and doubts all else
|-
|dumb down
|1933
|
|-
|Eagle Scout
|1913
|the highest rank in the [[Boy Scouts]], the term also means "a straight-arrow and self-reliant man."<ref>Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (1994).</ref>
|-
|editorialize
|1856
|"to introduce opinion into the reporting of facts"<ref>Merriam-Webster (1994).</ref>
|-
|[[efficiency]]
|1633
|ultimately from the Latin ''efficientem'', meaning ''"working out, or accomplishing"''<ref>[http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=efficient Online Etymological Dictionary]</ref>
|-
|egotism
|1714
|the root of atheism, as explained by Paul in Romans 1:21-22; the root of depression and anxiety also
|-
|[[elementary proof]]
|1865
|a mathematical proof based on the minimum assumptions associated with real analysis; term probably does not predate [[complex analysis]] and its first use may have been the English mathematician James Joseph Sylvester's paper, "On an elementary proof and generalisation of Sir Isaac Newton's hitherto undenionstrated rule for the discovery of imaginary roots."<ref>http://www.archive.org/stream/circular129johnuoft/circular129johnuoft_djvu.txt</ref>
|-
|[[elitism]]
|1950
|
|-
|[[entitlement]]
|1944
|
|-
|entrepreneur
|1852
|
|-
|[[ethnic voting]]
|1900s
|widely recognized and even advocated by some,<ref>http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/5/2/3/4/p152345_index.html</ref> yet the dictionary doesn't yet recognize it
|-
|Eurosceptic
|1970s
|someone who opposes joining the super-socialist [[European Union]]; some prefer the term "Eurorealist" to express this opposition, and sometimes "Eurosceptic" is used to criticize opponents of the EU
|-
|exceptional
|1787
|same year of origin as the [[U.S. Constitution]]!
|-
|exculpatory
|1781
|often used in the phrase "exculpatory evidence," it took nearly 50 years to develop this term after origination of the legal term suggesting guilt: "incriminate"
|-
|faith healing
|1885
|
|-
|[[falsifiability]]
|1934
|first emphasized by Karl Popper in 1934, this helps define science: if a proposition is false, then it can be shown to be false. If not, then the proposition is not scientific.
|-
|[[family values]]
|1916
|widespread use after a speech by Vice President [[Dan Quayle]], 1992
|-
|father figure
|1934
|someone who fulfills the essential role of a father
|-
|[[federalism]]
|1789
|the unique system of dual sovereigns, state and federal (national), established by the [[U.S. Constitution]]
|-
|feedback
|1920
|an all-important element of accountability and improvement, and a key consideration in good engineering design
|-
|[[fellow traveller]]
|1925
|may have existed earlier, but popularized in 1924 by Leon Trotsky. Describes a sympathizer of a cause but who does not formally belong to the cause, such as a [[communist]] sympathizer who is not part of the communist party. The term was invented by the communists in its original, non-negative sense, but the conservatives were the first to use it as a pejorative term.
|-
|[[Flip flop (politics)|flip-flop]]
|1976
|''verb'', meaning to change political position, typically due to [[liberal]] pressure. First used by the Republican S.I. Hayakawa campaign to describe California Democratic incumbent U.S. Senator John Tunney, whom Hayakawa defeated in an upset.
|-
|force-feed
|1901
|what liberals do to students in [[public schools]] today in training them to be [[atheist]]ic socialists
|-
|forward-looking
|1800
|planning for the future rather than dwelling on the past
|-
|Founding Fathers
|1914
|the several dozen [[Christian]] men <ref>[http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html Religious Affiliation of the Founding Fathers of the United States of America, Adherents.com]</ref> who helped draft the formative documents of the United States
|-
|[[free enterprise]]
|1820
|
|-
|free market
|1907
|
|-
|free world
|1949
|areas of the world free of communism
|-
|galvanize
|1802
|as in, "the liberal proposals ''galvanized'' the grassroots in opposition"
|-
|gang up
|1925
|group pressure
|-
|gateway drug
|1982
|abuse of alcohol/marijuana eventually leads to harder drugs cocaine/heroin
|-
|gerrymandering
|1812
|coined by a newspaper editor to criticize the manipulation of the lines of a new district into a salamander shape<ref>http://www.allbusiness.com/information/publishing-industries/251259-1.html</ref> that favored election of a liberal politician
|-
|gimmick
|1922
|originally meant a deceptive mechanical device for controlling a [[gambling]] machine, and then its meaning expanded to include all trickery to attract attention
|-
|globalism
|1997
|MW states it was first used in 1943<ref>http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/globalism</ref> and the OED gives a date of 1965 for the exact term 'globalism'<ref>http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50095613/50095613se2?single=1&query_type=word&queryword=globalism&first=1&max_to_show=10&hilite=50095613se2</ref> the term "globalization" was first used in the mid-1980s in a different, complimentary sense.
|-
|godsend
|1820
|
|-
|go-getter
|1921
|
|-
|gold standard
|1831
|the highest standard; in currency, when money could be exchanged for a fixed amount of gold
|-
|Good Samaritan
|1640
|how genuine charity is the best approach
|-
|goon
|1926
|a dim-witted thug, espec. one who intimidates on behalf of a union
|-
|[[grade inflation]]
|1975
|the tendency by Liberal educationalists and public schools to increase marks, irrespective of merit or actual achievement.
|-
|[[grassroots]]
|1901
|
|-
|Great Awakening
|1730-1740
|Christian spiritualism recurs periodically. See [[Essay:The Coming Fifth Great Awakening in America]].
|-
|Gresham's law
|1858
|the tendency in a free market for bad money (which loses its value) to drive out (be used more often in transactions) than good money (which retains its value), because people want to horde the good money while getting rid of the bad money; a similar effect can be seen when profanity drives out intelligent discussion
|-
|groupthink
|1952
|a style of thought consisting of conformity to a manufactured consensus and self-deception; coined by William H. Whyte in 1952.
|-
|hallmark
|1721
|purity, authentic, official seal, distinguishing feature
|-
|hardworking
|1774
|
|-
|harmless error
|1861
|an insignificant violation of a duty or procedural rule; first used in ''Western Ins. Co. v. The Goody Friends'', 29 F. Cas. 764 (S.D. Ohio 1861) (referring to a duty)
|-
|hatchet job
|1944
|still looking for the context of its first use; today it means an article, typically by a liberal, that misleadingly smears someone, typically a conservative
|-
|Hawthorne effect
|1962
|the increase in achievement resulting merely from being observed; this was demonstrated by experiment at the Hawthorne Works of Western Electric in Cicero, Illinois
|-
|heckler's veto
|1965
|coined by University of Chicago Law Professor Harvey Kalven, Jr., a strong supporter of free speech in politics, this term has been used in [[Supreme Court]] decisions by Justices [[Sam Alito]],<ref>''See'' ''Pleasant Grove City v. Summum'', 129 S. Ct. 1125 (2009); ''see also'' ''Child Evangelism Fellowship of N.J., Inc. v. Stafford Twp. Sch. Dist.'', 386 F.3d 514 (3rd Cir. 2004).</ref> [[Antonin Scalia]], and [[Clarence Thomas]].<ref>''Good News Club v. Milford Cent. Sch.'', 533 U.S. 98 (2001)</ref>
|-
|Hobson's choice
|1649<ref>this term has the entertaining history of originating with an English liveryman who required customers to "choose" the horse closest to the door.</ref>
|an ostensible choice that disguises a lack of freedom, because each alternative is completely unacceptable. This term is invoked to criticize an illusory freedom of choice. This term has been used in 48 cases by Supreme Court Justices, more often by conservatives than by liberals.
|-
|honor system
|1903
|an approach to discipline that emphasizes and encourages trust, honesty and personal responsibility rather than constant supervision
|-
|[[homeschool]]
|1980<ref>the OED assigns a date of origin of 1850 to "homeschool".</ref>
|
|-
|[[homosexual agenda]]
|1989
|used to promote the agenda in the book ''After the Ball'', but then used to criticize the movement by Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] in his dissent in''Lawrence v. Texas'' (2003)''
|-
|human rights
|1766
|rights of all peoples, such as to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" as set forth in the [[Declaration of Independence]]
|-
|hypothesis
|1656
|a suggestion, typically scientific in nature, which must be tested and proven before asserted as truth
|-
|hysteria
|1801
|From the Latin ''hystericus'', from Greek ''hystera '' meaning ''"womb"''<ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hysteria Meriam Webster Dictionary]</ref> (an old notion that hysteria was caused by the [[womb]]).
|-
|identity politics
|1988
|exploiting politics for racial, ethnic, gender equality.
|-
|illiteracy
|1660
|liberals seek to produce illiterate voters who lack independence, and many graduates of the [[public schools]] are illiterate today
|-
|incidental inequality
|2009
|inequalities that result as side effects of an objectively just system
|-
|incoherent
|1626
|the term often applies to liberal [[double standard]]s
|-
|incompleteness
|1931
|a system of logic or mathematics that includes propositions that are impossible to prove or disprove; term coined as a result of [[Kurt Godel]]'s work in 1931
|-
|incrementalism
|1966
|imposing bad political or social change slowly
|-
|independence
|1640
|free will
|-
|individualism
|1827
|values, rights and duties arise from the individual
|-
|inflationary
|1920
|policies causing inflation of the monetary supply
|-
|informed consent
|1967
|consent to surgery is meaningful only if informed, a requirement that should apply to abortion
|-
|initiative
|1793
|self-starting first step toward improvement
|-
|insightful
|1907
|what conservatism is about: gaining insights into the truth, and bettering individuals and society with them
|-
|intangible
|1914
|something valuable that cannot be seen or touched, such as goodwill
|-
|intellectual property
|1845
|"we [should] protect intellectual property, the labors of the mind, productions and interests as much a man's own, and as much the fruit of his honest industry, as the wheat he cultivates, or the flocks he rears." ''Davoll v. Brown'', 7 F. Cas. 197 (Cir. Ct. Mass. 1845) (Woodbury, federal judge).
|-
|interventionism
|1923
|"governmental interference in economic affairs at home or in political affairs of another country"<ref>Merriam-Webster (1994).</ref>
|-
|invisible hand
|1776
|coined by Adam Smith in the ''Wealth of Nations'' and widely used today.
|-
|[[invisible hand of marriage]]
|2008
|discovered on Conservapedia, it is the unseen force of productivity that results from marriage (only between a man and woman).
|-
|Iron curtain
|1945
|coined by Winston Churchill in a speech in Missouri just after World War II, to describe the communist's figurative wall against freedom
|-
|[[irreducible complexity]]
|1996
|coined by [[Michael Behe]] as a structure or system that could not possibly have evolved, because removing any part makes it nonfunctional, thereby showing that [[God]] must have created it whole into biology; if the [[Nobel Prize]] were not dominated by [[atheism]], Behe could win one for this insight.
|-
|ivory tower
|1910
|a description of the pampered culture of liberal [[professor values|professors]], and how far out of touch with the truth it is
|-
|John Hancock
|1903
|a personal signature, especially in a bold style that stands up for principles as John Hancock did with his signing the Declaration of Independence
|-
|[[judicial activism]]
|1947
|first coined in an article in ''Fortune'' magazine by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.,<ref>http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/278089</ref> and repeatedly used in U.S. Supreme Court opinions since 1967,<ref>''United States v. Wade'',
388 U.S. 218 (1967).</ref> yet as of 2009 [[Merriam-Webster]] dictionary still fails to recognize this widely used term.
|-
|judicial prejudice
|2009
|the bias of a judge in favor of a political correct identity group intended to rig outcome equality in favor of that group based on subjective bias rather than objective justice.
|-
|judicial restraint
|1942
|"Assuming that this court has power to act, it does not necessarily follow that it should act. ... In a number of situations, and in a number of cases, it has been held that courts should voluntarily refrain from using or asserting power. Where the use or assertion of power might be destructive of a well defined purpose of law or of a declared public policy such voluntarily imposed '''judicial restraint''' may be commendable."<ref>Osage Tribe of Indians v. Ickes, 45 F. Supp. 179, 184-85 (D.D.C. 1942) (emphasis added).</ref>
|-
|judicial supremacist
|2004
|one who advocates that the courts should be supreme over the other branches of government for certain legal issues; first coined in a book by [[Phyllis Schlafly]]; first used by the judiciary by the Michigan Supreme Court in ''Paige v. City of Sterling Heights'', 476 Mich. 495 (2006).<ref>A similar yet different concept, "judicial supremacy," was coined by [[conservative]] Supreme Court Justice [[Robert H. Jackson]] as the title of his book,'' The Struggle for Judicial Supremacy: A Study of a Crisis in American Political Power'' (New York: Knopf, 1941).</ref>
|-
|[[judicial taking]]
|1982
|the deprivation of private property due to a court decision; this concept was introduced by conservative Justice [[Potter Stewart]] in 1967, and the term was used for the first time independently by the Michigan and Hawaii Supreme Courts in the same month (!) in December 1982, and then used often in law review articles and Circuit Court decisions in the 2000s, and then four Justices of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] endorsed the principle in a decision in 2010, with two others accepting the possibility.
|-
|[[junk science]]
|1962<ref>http://rated.com/dir/Society/Issues/Environment/Opposing_Views/Junk_Science</ref>
|the corruption of the scientific method to advance other, often political, goals (such as [[Global Warming]])
|-
|jury nullification
|1948
|the power of a jury to overrule the law and acquit an ostensibly guilty defendant; the power was established in the colonies in 1735 in the trial of [[John Peter Zenger]], but this term was first used in state court by Pfeuffer v. Haas, 55 S.W.2d 111 (Tex. Civ. App. 1932) and in federal court by ''Skidmore v. Baltimore & O. R. Co.'', 167 F.2d 54 (2nd Cir. 1948)
|-
|kiss of death
|1943
|from Judas's betrayal of Jesus with a kiss, Mark 14:44-4
|-
|kowtow
|1826
|obsequious, unthinking obedience to someone or something, used especially in the context of dictatorships and liberal belief systems
|-
|Kremlinology
|1958
|the study of the otherwise indecipherable behavior of the government of the [[communist]] [[Soviet Union]]. Refers to the Kremlin, the traditional seat of Russian government (Soviet or not).
|-
|labor camp
|1900
|forced work prison
|-
|laissez-faire
|1825
|opposing governmental interference in economic affairs beyond what is minimally necessary
|-
|lame duck
|1761
|one falling being in achievement, especially a public official whose power is limited because his term in office is set to expire without possibility of reelection.
|-
|lamestream media
|2009
|coined by Bernie Goldberg to describe the clueless [[Mainstream media]] that repeat superficial, discredited liberal claptrap
|-
|landslide
|1838
|In the political sense, an overwhelming election victory. A clear, democratic expression of popular will.
|-
|leadership
|1821
|an ability and willingness to lead, often by example
|-
|leftism
|1920
|principles and doctrine of leftists
|-
|leverage
|1830
|
|-
|life vest
|1939
|a pro-life invention
|-
|local
|1824<ref>This date refers to its first usage as a ''noun'', which is an estimate of its adoption as a concept.</ref>
|common usage: "all politics is local"
|-
|locomotive
|1829
|a great engine of economic growth during the [[Industrial Revolution]]
|-
|lone wolf
|1909
|a person who prefers to work, act, or live alone. <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lone%20wolf Lone wolf, Merriam-Webster]</ref> synonymous with self-sufficiency
|-
|loose cannon
|1973
|an undisciplined person or program that dangerously lacks forethought; used in mid-November 1976 to describe $11 billion in unspent appropriations by the Ford Administration: "'That money,' says Arnold Packer, a senior Senate Budget Committee economist who is helping Carter draw up his shadow budget, 'is like a loose cannon rolling around the deck' because a sudden reappearance of the funds could be inflationary." (''BusinessWeek'')
|-
|lunatic fringe
|1913
|coined by U.S. President [[Theodore Roosevelt]] to describe members of eccentric, radical or extremist groups<ref> http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=lunatic</ref>
|-
|machismo
|1948
|a word never used favorably by feminists!
|-
|man-hater
|1970s<ref>This was during the epic struggle -- and defeat -- of the so-called [[Equal Rights Amendment]].</ref>
|William Safire wrote in the ''New York Times'' in 1983, "Misandry, from the Greek misandros for 'hating men,' is in the 1961 Merriam-Webster New International Dictionary, and the Oxford Dictionary Supplement traces it to 1946. The word is pronounced as 'Ms. Andry,' but I wonder why we need the Greek word for it. What's wrong with good, old-fashioned man-hater?"<ref>Sunday, Oct. 30, 1983, Section 6, Page 12, Column 3.</ref>
|-
|make-work
|1923
|inefficient or useless activity that has the false appearance of being productive; a favorite endeavor of liberals
|-
|manifest destiny
|1845
|Providential design over future events, which originated in the context of expanding the United States to the Pacific Ocean
|-
|materialism
|1748
|the view of life that physical matter is all that exists; as an "ism", the term criticizes such view
|-
|melting pot
|1912
|requires "social and cultural assimilation" for successful immigration<ref>Merriam-Webster dictionary (1994)</ref>
|-
|[[meritocracy]]
|1958
|
|-
|[[microeconomics]]
|1947
|the study of the economics of the individual person or business
|-
|mindset
|1909
|close-minded point-of-view, typically in adherence to a liberal falsehood and often to the exclusion of Christ
|-
|missile defense
|1980s
|popularized by President Ronald Reagan as part of [[SDI]]
|-
|missionary
|1625
|someone sent on a mission, typically a religious mission
|-
|mobocracy
|1754
|rule by a mob, as at Wikipedia
|-
|monogamy
|1612
|this has the same date of origin as "productive", and that may not be a coincidence!
|-
|motivation
|1873
|can you believe the word did not exist before 1873?!
|-
|muckety–muck
|1912
|a pejorative term for an arrogant person who holds a title or position considered to be important by others
|-
|muckraker
|1910
|a person who searches out and publicly exposes [[deceit]]<ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/muckraker Merriam-Webster - Muckraker]</ref>
|-
|Murphy's Law
|1958
|if something can go wrong, then it will go wrong: this was a conservative insight by an engineer Edward Murphy
|-
|muscle car
|1967
|placing a powerful engine in a classic two-door car for highly efficient performance; also celebrate masculine style against erosion by feminism
|-
|myopic
|1752
|originally a term in optometry, 1990's used to describe liberals' lack of foresight
|-
|nanny state
|1978
|"Under the New Economic Policy, [the new French Prime Minister Raymond] Barre has made it clear that industrial lame ducks can no longer count on the generosity of Nanny i.e. the state - for bailing out."<ref>Leo Ryan, "Economy Shored up: France's new surge of liberalism," The Globe and Mail (Canada) (Aug. 1, 1978)</ref> Note how two powerful new conservative terms led to a third here!
|-
|negativism
|1824
|mental attitude that tends that is skeptical about almost everything, except one's own views
|-
|newspeak
|1949
|political or media expressions using circumlocution and euphemisms to disguise or distract from the truth; first coined by [[George Orwell]] in ''[[1984]]''
|-
|non-justiciable
|1922<ref>Used by the state attorneys for West Virginia (including Philip Steptoe, founder of Steptoe & Johnson) in ''Pennsylvania v. West Virginia'', 262 U.S. 553 (1923): "It is not the 'subject of judicial cognizance,' Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1, 15; Louisiana v. Texas, 176 U.S 1, 15; Missouri v. Illinois, 180 U.S. 208, 233, or 'susceptible of judicial solution.' Louisiana v. Texas, 176 U.S. 1, 18, 22; Missouri v. Illinois, 180 U.S. 208, 233, 234."</ref>
|a difficult issue that the courts should not attempt to resolve, often because it is too political in nature
|-
|non-locality
|1920s
|[[action at a distance]] at the atomic level; even though proven, it is still opposed by those who believe in [[relativity]] and still not recognized by Merriam-Webster
|-
|Old Glory
|1862
|the ''United States of America'' flag, Stars & Stripes
|-
|one-size-fits-all
|1996<ref>Was there an earlier conservative use? Frank Zappa's album cover in the 1970s does not count!</ref>
|Lee Wishing, director of communications for conservative [[Grove City College]], in criticism of how the government administers student loans: "Unfortunately, with government programs, it's one size fits all."<ref>http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/1996/dec96/er-dec96.html</ref> The 2008 Republican platform states, "We reject a one-size-fits-all approach and support parental options, including home schooling, and local innovations such as schools or classes for boys only or for girls only and alternative and innovative school schedules."<ref>http://platform.gop.com/2008Platform.pdf</ref>
|-
|one-trick pony
|1980
|a person or group that relies repeatedly on the same gimmick, as in "the media are a one-trick pony in their criticism of [[Rand Paul]]"
|-
|open-minded
|1828
|see [[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness]]
|-
|[[opportunity cost]]
|1911
|
|-
|optimism
|1759
|
|-
|originalism
|1985
|taken from original intent, The belief that the United States Constitution should be interpreted in the way the authors originally intended it
|-
|Orwellian
|1960s
|terminology or style that advances the power of big government but is hurtful or nonsensical<ref>http://www.ntu.org/main/press.php?PressID=604</ref>
|-
|ostensibly
|1765
|having an outward appearance that may not reflect the underlying truth; good potential use is Luke 3:23 in describing Jesus as the son of Joseph
|-
|parenting
|1958
|children raising
|-
|Parkinson's Law
|1955
|how bureaucracies expand regardless of the productivity, and how inefficient work expands to fill the time available for its completion
|-
|[[patent troll]]
|2001
|a company that obtains or buys up patents for the sole purpose of asserting infringement claims, and without any intention of actually manufacturing the invention; the term was first coined by Peter Detkin, in-house counsel to Intel
|-
|patriotism
|1726
|
|-
|Pavlovian
|1926
|a conditioned, automatic and unthinking response to a signal; it has been used twice by [[conservative]] Supreme Court Justices. "It is well established that this Court does not, or at least should not, respond in Pavlovian fashion to confessions of error by the [[Solicitor General]]." ''De Marco v. United States'', 415 U.S. 449, 451 (1974) ([[Rehnquist]], J., dissenting); "'[[Incorporation doctrine|Incorporation]]' has become so Pavlovian that my Brother BLACK barely mentions the [[Fourteenth Amendment]] in the course of an 11-page opinion dealing with the procedural rule the State of [[Florida]] has adopted for cases tried in Florida courts under Florida's criminal laws." '' Williams v. Fla.'', 399 U.S. 78, 144 (1970) ([[Potter Stewart|Stewart]], J., dissenting and concurring).
|-
|perpetual war
|1947
|Coined by historian Charles A. Beard,<ref>Charles A. Beard is best known for interpreting the Constitution as being primarily motivated by economic interests.</ref> it has been used most recently by [[Ann Coulter]]
|-
|[[personhood]] <ref>[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/personhood Personhood] Dictionary.com</ref>
|1955
|Inherent rights guaranteed to all human beings from the beginning of their biological development, including the pre-born, partially born. Also, the state or fact of being a person.
|-
|Philadelphia
|1682
|coined by [[William Penn]] and meaning "city of brotherly love," the concept captures the "[[best of the public]]" approach
|-
|[[phonics]]
|1684
|conservatives have long championed phonics to promote literacy, Bible-reading, and informed voters; liberals take the opposite position
|-
|phony
|1900<ref>This surprisingly recent origin appears to be derived from a British confidence game.</ref>
|needed to address [[liberal deceit]]
|-
|political machine
|1905
|a pejorative term for local and typically Democratic power structures that prevent outsiders from winning elections; first used by George Washington Plunkitt to criticize the Tammany Hall machine for which he served
|-
|[[politically correct]]
|1983
|This term originated among radicals at the [[University of Wisconsin-Madison]] to enforce radical orthodoxy, but immediately flipped in usage to become a term of mockery of radicals.<ref>For an early different usage of the word, see 1793 J. WILSON in U.S. Rep. (U.S. Supreme Court) 2 (1798) 462 Sentiments and expressions of this inaccurate kind prevail in our..language... ‘The United States’, instead of the ‘People of the United States’, is the toast given. This is not politically correct.</ref> The term may have come from Chairman Mao in 1936.
|-
|politicize
|1846
|seeking political gain at the expense of truth or quality<ref>The Merriam-Webster definition (1994 ed.) is incomplete and unclear: "to give a political tone or character to"</ref>
|-
|potential
|1817<ref>Usage here refers to "promise", not "possibility".</ref>
|
|-
|privatize
|1940
|to return a business or enterprise from state to private control; to de-nationalize.
|-
|proactive
|1933
|
|-
|productive
|1612
|
|-
|productivity
|1810
|the gap of about 200 years between the creation of "productive" and "productivity" is astounding
|-
|[[pro-life]]
|1960
|
|-
|property right
|1853
|
|-
|provocateur
|1919
|someone who spends more time causing unproductive conflicts rather than advancing knowledge, accomplishing legitimate goals, or helping anyone
|-
|quantify
|1840
|
|-
|race card
|1995<ref>This is the date of its widespread familiarity.</ref>
|"Playing the race card" consists of relying on racial emotions or charges of racism in order to overcome the truth and logic in politics, legal proceedings, or otherwise; this term became familiar in the criticism of the defense and acquittal of O.J. Simpson for the murder of his ex-wife and her friend.
|-
|rapture
|1629
|spiritual ecstasy[http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=rapture]
|-
|[[recidivism]]
|1886
|the tendency for people lacking in [[faith]] and determination to revert to prior patterns of harmful behavior, such as repeat criminal offenders
|-
|recuse
|1949
|self-removal by a decision-maker (especially a judge) because of possible bias with respect to the pending issue
|-
|red tape
|1736
|excessive bureaucracy and procedural complexity which frustrate meaningful activity and progress
|-
|[[relativism]]
|1865
|the view that ethical truths are not absolute, but depend on the person or group that holds them
|-
|[[responsibility]]
|1737
|1787 HAMILTON Federalist No. 63 II. 193 Responsibility in order to be reasonable must be limited to objects within the power of the responsible party.
|-
|reverse discrimination
|1969
|the use of quotas or affirmative action to use race or gender to discriminate against a better qualified person
|-
|revisionism
|1903<ref>The first use of this term, now obscure, refers to a Marxist movement that preferred evolutionary rather than revolutionary change.</ref>
|distortions of history to promote liberal bias
|-
|riot act
|1715<ref>Its colloquial use, as in "read them the riot act," began in 1819.</ref>
|the Riot Act was a law passed in England in 1715 to authorize officials to disperse riots
|-
|sacred cow
|1910
|a person or idea, typically liberal, that becomes immune from criticism because of its political usefulness rather than its truthfulness, as in the theories of [[evolution]] and [[relativity]]
|-
|scapegoating
|1943
|a term criticizing how people, particularly liberals, deflect accountability and blame from themselves to others; inspired by Leviticus 16:8.
|-
|salutary neglect
|1775
|coined by the [[conservative]] [[Edmund Burke]] in his 1775 speech to the British [[House of Commons]] entitled "On Moving His Resolutions for Conciliation with the Colonies"<ref>http://www.archive.org/stream/burkesspeechonco00burkuoft/burkesspeechonco00burkuoft_djvu.txt</ref>
|-
|school choice
|1980
|popularized by Milton Friedman in his book, ''Free to Choose''
|-
|[[scientific fascism]]
|2009
|a coordinated effort by a group of scientists to enforce a certain point of view upon others.
|-
|Segway
|2001
|Dean Kamen's trademark spelling of "segue" for use of Yankee Ingenuity to improve efficiency, to refer to a form of battery-powered transportation.
|-
|[[self-defense]]
|1651
|
|-
|self-destruct
|1968
|often the tragic result of liberal falsehoods
|-
|[[Discipline|self-discipline]]
|1838
|
|-
|self-reliant
|1848
|
|-
|separation of powers
|1748
|the fundamental insight underlying the [[U.S. Constitution]]
|-
|skullduggery
|1867
|underhanded or unscrupulous behavior
|-
|slippery slope
|1900s
|term has been widely used for decades to expose the fallacy of "it doesn't hurt to try"
|-
|smoke and mirrors
|1979
|something intended to disguise or draw attention away from an often embarrassing or unpleasant issue. <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/smoke%20and%20mirrors Smoke and Mirrors, Merriam-Webster]</ref> Widely used during the 1990s to describe [[Bill Clinton]]'s political strategy.
|-
|smoking gun
|1974
|a law-and-order term, "smoking gun" was first used as figurative term in a reported judicial decision in ''Rodgers v. United States Steel Corp.'', 1975 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12775 (W.D. Pa. Apr. 20, 1975), and many literal uses of the term in court decisions before that!
|-
|[[socialist]]
|1827
|someone who advocates government control over the economy, and particularly state control of the means of production
|-
|social justice rhetoric
|2009
|Language and rhetorical ploys equating equality of outcome with justice.
|-
|spend-and-tax
|2009<ref>http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/02/morning-bell-the-obama-tax-and-spend-economy-is-here/</ref>
|a variation on "tax-and-spend" (see below), "spend-and-tax" consists of spending the money first and then trying to justify raising taxes based on the deficit created by the spending
|-
|stalking horse
|1788
|a candidate or issue that serves to increase the chances that ''another'' will win, as in "antifederalists attempted to win elections by using 'the stalking horse of amendments.'"<ref>''Centinel'', 1788 (quoted in ''The Federalist party in Massachusetts to the year 1800'', By Anson Ely Morse).</ref>
|-
|[[statism]]
|1919
|advocates for centralized government and government ownership
|-
|straightforward
|1806
|something liberals are not
|-
|straw man
|1896
|an imaginary argument or example set up for the purpose of easily knocking down, while distracting from valid arguments
|-
|Stupaked
|2010
|hurt by someone who reassured everyone he would do the right thing, but then switched at the last minute to do the opposite (refers especially to [[abortion betrayal]]s)<ref>Columnist Kathleen Parker is credited with first coining this term.</ref>
|-
|supply-side
|1976
|the economic theory that reducing taxes expands economic activity by encouraging greater earnings and investments; proven successful during the Reagan Administration in the 1980s
|-
|takeover
|1917
|as in the takeover of government by the communist revolution in that year
|-
|tax-and-spend
|1937
|not yet recognized by Merriam-Webster, it is included in dictionary.com and it means the liberal policy of raising taxes and increasing government spending
|-
|taxpayer
|1816
|the word highlights who is really paying for things
|-
|[[term limits]]
|1861
|can you believe this is not in the dictionary yet? Merriam-Webster omits it, but dictionary.com has it<ref>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/term+limit</ref>
|-
|terrorism
|1795
|this was during the French Revolution
|-
|[[textualism]]
|1952
|first used by Justice [[Robert Jackson]] in his influential concurrence in ''[[Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer]]'', 343 U.S. 579 (1952), it now describes the legal philosophy of Justice [[Antonin Scalia]]
|-
|top-notch
|1900
|the highest quality, which requires respect for merit to recognize
|-
|[[totalitarianism]]
|1926
|term which identifies the similarities of fascist and communist regimes and ideologies and urges resistance
|-
|tour de force
|1802
|a feat of skill
|-
|trademark
|1838
|extends the concept of private property to the marks used by business
|-
|traditionalist
|1856
|"adherence to the doctrines or practices of a tradition...the beliefs of those opposed to modernism, liberalism, or radicalism"<ref>http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/traditionalist</ref>
|-
|[[transaction cost]]
|1961
|Economist [[Ronald Coase]] won a [[Nobel Prize]] for this.
|-
|[[transistor]]
|1948
|named by John R. Pierce and developed at the [[conservative]] [[Bell Labs]], this invention epitomized Yankee ingenuity; Pierce was a critic of claims of [[artificial intelligence]] and was the future developer of [[Telstar]], a precursor to the [[Strategic Defense Initiative]]
|-
|tree huggers
|1970s
|still not recognized by the dictionary, this term criticizes extreme environmentalists, but they proudly use the term also to describe what they literally do
|-
|trivia
|1920
|insignificant detail, which can sometimes obscure what is important and distract people from the Bible; liberal [[Wikipedia]] is filled with trivial junk
|-
|Trojan horse
|1837
|describes a type of liberal [[deceit]]: subversion from within
|-
|trust but verify
|1980s
|popularized by President Ronald Reagan as the approach to use towards communist [[deceit]]
|-
|ugly duckling
|1883
|an unpromising appearance but often with great unseen potential
|-
|ultra vires
|1793
|beyond the authority, especially of a government or corporate official
|-
|unborn child
|1791
|the rights of the unborn child have been recognized in English law since the 1600s, but the specific term "unborn child" itself may have been first used by an attorney arguing before the New Jersey Supreme Court in ''Den v. Sparks'', 1 N.J.L. 67 (Sup. Ct. 1791)
|-
|underdog
|1887
|[[David]] v. [[Goliath]], [[Cinderella]], [[best of the public]], etc.
|-
|underemployed
|1908
|having less than full-time or suitable employment
|-
|vandalism
|1798
|malicious destruction of someone else's property
|-
|veracity
|1623
|devotion to truthfulness
|-
|vet
|1904<ref>http://www.slate.com/id/2199254/?from=rss</ref>
|a verb meaning to screen for flaws
|-
|[[victimization]]
|1840
|
|-
|volunteer
|1618
|someone who freely offers to help
|-
|wannabe
|1981
|a word that criticizes liberal [[status worship]]
|-
|War on Terror
|2001
|no listing at Merriam-Webster February 2, 2009 Obama ends use of the conservative lexicon. <ref>[http://pewforum.org/news/display.php?NewsID=17455 Obama administration drops 'war on terror' phrase] Pew Forum, February 2, 2009</ref>
|-
|waterloo
|1816
|a final defeat or setback, coined merely one year after the [[English]] defeated [[Napoleon]] at the [[Battle of Waterloo]]; there has never been a "waterloo" for [[Christianity]] or [[conservatism]]
|-
|wildcatter
|1883
|a pro-energy term that describes someone who drills for oil in fields not known to have oil
|-
|word poverty
|2001<ref>http://www.aft.org/pubs-reports/american_educator/summer2001/lang_gap_moats.html</ref>
|popularized by President [[George W. Bush]]
|-
|work (physical sense)
|1826
|a physical measure<ref>force times distance</ref> of effort used to increase energy
|-
|work ethic
|1951
|a habit of working as a moral good
|-
|worldview
|1858
|a comprehensive way of looking at life and the world; sometimes used to criticize a liberal's irrational belief system
|-
|yellow journalism
|1898
|the practice, started by newspaper publishers Joseph Pulitzer and his rival William Randolph Hearst, of sensationalizing and biasing newspaper headlines and articles in order to influence public opinion
|-
|}

__TOC__ 

== Conservative Words Not Yet Recognized by the Dictionary ==

A thousand new words are developed in English each year. Here is a growing list of conservative concepts, each of which is not yet defined by a single word or two.

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Not Yet Recognized Terms
!Suggestions
!Comments
|-
|pre-9/11 thinking
|9/10 mindset
|terror is jurisdiction of the courts
|-
|anti-family
|tradition opposer, familiopathic
|
|-
|causing harm by spreading falsehoods
|deceit
|e.g., denying or concealing disease and infertility caused by promiscuity
|-
|cradle to grave <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/spanish/from%20cradle%20to%20grave cradle to grave- no entry found] Merriam-Websters</ref>
|sanctity of life, conception to natural death
|pro-life stance, also can mean socialist entitlement programs
|-
|cut and run
|surrender advocates
|when the going gets tough, run away from the problem
|-
|[[deliberate ignorance]]
|mind-locked, self-centered pride obscuring the truth
|the term exists; the dictionary does not yet include it
|-
|denial that [[Hell]] exists
|Hell-denier? Antinfernal? (Should be "antihadessic" so as not to mix Hellenate and Latinate roots)
|
|-
|[[abstinence denial|denier of the effectiveness of abstinence]]
|abstinence-denier?
|
|-
|drive-by media
|partisan slander
|liberal mainstream media assault on the GOP or conservative principles, deceitful attacks for opposing viewpoints
|-
|[[earmark]]
|
|spending on specific projects at the request of a particular congressman, and without meaningful examination by others voting on it
|-
|easily amused by [[deceit]]
|dolophile
|from Greek/Latin root ''dolo-'' meaning guile, deceit, deception [http://www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view_unit/664]
|-
|family-friendly
|wholesome
|describes TV programming, websites, social events that are not offensive
|-
|Hatred of one's country, refusal to recognize the good elements of it, or unreasonably critical of it
|misopatria, misopatrist
|From Greek ''misein'', to hate, and Latin ''patria'', nation or homeland
|-
|heavenly body
|celestial body
|natural objects visible in the sky
|-
|hellbound
|
|recognized by over 1.3 million sites in a Google search and no substitute term is available, yet dictionaries refuse to recognize it
|-
|Hoax and Chains
|[[Keynesian economics]]
|a phonetic play on the rhetoric slogan of Hope and Change. Hope replaced by unemployment and Change represents obsessive tax burdens.
|-
|hoax plant
|fake townhall, kkk teaparty
|a term to describe a deceitful method of placing an operative that appears to be part of a group in order to push an agenda or to make a competing agenda look ridiculous.
|-
|[[Hollywood values]]
|West Coast Hedonism
|Over 800,000 results on Google, not yet recognized by Merriam-Webster
|-
|[[Illegal Alien|illegal alien]]
|
|widely used in court decisions and political discourse for years, Merriam-Webster still does not recognize it is as a term.
|-
|infotainment
|tabloid news, dramacast
|mainstream media presents drama fluff stories as news, e.g. 20/20 - Datelin
|-
|[[limited government]]
|we the people democracy
|first testament to this was the [[U.S. Constitution]], defining [[Reagan]]s presidency, can't be found in Merriam-Websters. <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/limited%20government Limited government - Not found] Merriam-Webster's</ref>
|-
|[[limousine liberal]]
|hypocrite
|rich promoting causes which they themselves don't adhere to
|-
|merit pay
|performance bonus
|Doing your job better with perks as a reward. The typical liberal union teacher avoids merit pay at all costs, self before students.
|-
|[[militant gays]]
|intimidating homosexual
|
|-
|modern idolatry
|"media idolatry"; "money idolatry"; "celebrity idolatry"
|idolatry conjures images of golden calves, and a modern version is needed
|-
|moral fabric
|domestic tranquility
|ethics and virtues united for the common good of all
|-
|morally bankrupt
|[[atheism]], self-void
|ethically and spiritually challenged souls
|-
|opposite of [[global warming]]
|regional warming
|the North pole shrinks as the South pole increases
|-
|opposite of [[materialism]]
|spiritualism and idealism have been its philosophical opposites, historically
|[[dualism]] has been suggested, but it is not the ''opposite'' of [[materialism]]; "spiritualism" is not a common term and is the "opposite" of materialism
|-
|[[peer pressure]]
|used in titles to professional journal articles as early as 1994
|can you believe that isn't recognized by Merriam-Webster?
|-
|proven wrong, a refusal to admit it
|mulism; heel-digger?
|cf. mulish. This refusal is what promoted the [[Parable of the Good Samaritan]].
|-
|religious right
|Christian conservatives
|religion in America almost exclusively a conservative institution, no religious left term in existence.
|-
|reward failure
|TARP
|too big to fail, bailout bankrupt, mismanagement subsidized
|-
|rewrite history <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/rewrite%20history rewrite history not found, Merriam-Websters]</ref>
|[[deceit]], mislead
|Commonly used term describing liberal deceit to hide, defraud others about factual history.
|-
|rogue states
|rogue nations
|nations defying international law, only rogue is listed in Merriman-Websters
|-
|runaway jury
|The term has existed for decades, but Merriam-Webster has not recognized it yet.
|
|-
|Rule of Law
|
|
|-
|[[schlockumentary]]
|propaganda film
|documentary films based on falsehoods and half-truths
|-
|[[Second generation atheist|second-generation atheist]]
|cradle atheist
|
|-
|selective outrage
|partisan hypocrisy, bipolar
|to be against something to further a cause and reject, stay silent, ignore or discount something similar.
|-
|smear merchant
|serial slander
|to constantly hurl degrading or false accusations against others
|-
|strict constructionism
|
|an important term for over 200 years to describe adherence to the text of the Constitution, Merriam-Webster still does not recognize it.
|-
|[[Conservative| Traditional Values]]
| principles of Conservatism
|much the same as family values but incorporating all aspects society; family, religion, self-sufficiency, the truth, hard work. Only listed in Merriam-Websters to describe what Nilihism is against.
|-
|true emergency
|life support
|meaning a high probability of serious injury or death to an individual or property. Emergency has been watered down, e.g. to be locked out of one's car.
|-
|Unaffected by, or impervious to, the media
|mediaproof
|cf. bulletproof. ''Once John became aware of the extent of [[liberal deceit]], he set about mediaproofing his mind''.
|-
|}

== New Liberal Terms ==

New liberal words often have deceptive, or nonsensical, meanings. Here are some new words created by liberals to combat [[conservatism]]:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!New Term
!Origin date
!Comments
|-
|[[agnosticism|agnostic]]
|1860
|someone who claims to not know whether [[God]] exists but still lives like an [[atheist]]
|-
|[[atheism|atheist]]
|1571
|useful and often deceptive alternative name for an anti-Christian
|-
|[[Big Bang theory|big bang]]
|1948
|term invented by the leading [[British]] physicist Sir [[Fred Hoyle]] to ''mock'' this suggestion of how the universe was formed, but later accepted as a serious term rather than mockery;<ref>Compare this migration with that of "politically correct," which started out as a serious term but then adopted a sense of mockery</ref> it's liberal because it trivializes the beauty and the [[faith]] of the moment
|-
|bilingual education
|1972
|a euphemism describing a costly and hurtful program that hinders the learning of English by foreign-born children in American [[public school]]s, which hurts their future opportunities
|-
|[[carbon footprint]]
|1999<ref>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/carbon%20footprint</ref>
|this term indicates an individual human's effect on the environment by production of carbon dioxide
|-
|chairperson
|1971
|even Alice Sturgis, the leading parliamentarian of the 20th century, rejected this cumbersome form of political correctness.
|-
|check-off
|1911
|automatic deduction of union dues by the employer from the employee's paycheck, so he has no choice
|-
|[[class warfare]]
|
|first entered the political lexicon primarily as an attack by liberals against conservatives. <ref>[http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20030115.html The art of "class warfare"], Ben Fritz, Spinsanity.org, January 15, 2003</ref>
|-
|[[communism]]
|1840
|
|-
|compassionate-care clinics
|2008
|a term describe pot-shops that dispense medical marijuana <ref>[http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/11/magazines/fortune/medical_marijuana_legalizing.fortune/?postversion=2009091116 How marijuana became legal, CNN, September 11, 2009]</ref>
|-
|compassion fatigue
|1968
|liberals, driven by materialistic self-interest, are likely to suffer from this.
|-
|[[condescension]]
|1647
|treating another person as though they are inferior
|-
|[[creationism]]
|1880
|like most "isms", creationism is a derogatory term coined preferred most by opponents of it.
|-
|[[Dark Ages]]
|1730
|a term coined in the so-called [[enlightenment]] to disparage the period between the fall of the [[Roman Empire]] and c.1000, when the Christian faith, and its learning and culture, spread across Europe.
|-
|[[Dead white males|dead white males]]
|
|a disparaging term used of significant figures from previous generations by those who wish to undermine [[Cultural Literacy|cultural literacy]]
|-
|deconstruction
|1973
|a style of interpretation of texts that looks beyond the plain meaning of the text in order to infer or accuse the writers of social bias
|-
|diva
|1883
|modern use to describe female Hollywood/media personalities
|-
|[[Détente|detente]]
|1970s
|a euphemism referring to pacifist policy re. the Soviet Union
|-
|displaced foreign traveler <ref>[http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2010/07/bureaucrats-now.html Bureaucrats Now Call Illegal Aliens "Displaced Foreign Travelers", Moonbattery.com, July 21, 2010]</ref>
|2010
|another politically correct term for [[illegal alien]].
|-
|distributive justice
|
|a term used to redefine socialist abridgment of rights as "just"
|-
|[[enlightenment]]
|1669
|
|-
|[[Environmentalist|environmentalism]]
|1922
|a mixture of [[pseudoscience]] and neo-[[paganism]] used to justify the imposition of [[socialist]]ic controls.
|-
|[[exclusionary rule]]
|1964
|an invented rule that requires censoring and withholding from the jury certain incriminating evidence about a criminal defendant, simply based on how the evidence was obtained.
|-
|[[family planning]]
|1939
|planning intended to determine the number and spacing of one's children through birth control <ref>[http://mw1.m-w.com/dictionary/family%20planning Family Planning, Merriam-Webster]</ref>
|-
|freethinker
|1692
|the euphemism "free" hides the hostility towards faith, which is not free
|-
|[[fundamentalism]]
|1922
|"a movement in 20th century Protestantism emphasizing the literally interpreted Bible as fundamental to Christian life and teaching"<ref>http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fundamentalism</ref> From a series of pamphlets called "The Fundamentals" which outlined the movement. Perjorative usage started when the liberal [[Harry Emerson Fosdick]] began using the term in a straw man attack against [[Conservative Christianity]].
|-
|[[feminism]]
|1895
|notionally, "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes"; in reality, the attempt to destroy traditional family, societal and religious values by erasing or undermining natural gender differences.
|-
|[[gay rights]]
|1969
|the movement for civil rights for homosexuals
|-
|glass ceiling
|1984
|the notion that an invisible barrier prevents women and ethnic minorities from reaching high office; an excuse for [[feminist]]s and others to demand [[affirmative action]]
|-
|[[global warming]]
|1969
|the baseless [[environmentalist]] mantra that the earth's temperature is rising, and that human intervention is the cause.
|-
|[[goth]]
|?
|"a style of rock music, noted especially for somber or ethereal tones and lugubrious lyrics", or someone who performs or listens to this style of music.<ref>Dictionary.com, ''goth'' [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/goth]</ref> Goths often "dress in black with heavy jewelry".<ref>Dictionary.com, ''goth rock'' [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/goth%20rock]</ref> The term is taken from the name of "a Germanic people who invaded the Roman Empire in the early centuries of the Christian era".<ref>Dictionary.com, ''goth'' [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/goth]</ref>
|-
|gun control
|1969
|a euphemism for restricting the right to keep and bear arms
|-
|[[homophobia]]
|1969
|used by Liberals to describe a failure to subscribe 100% to the [[homosexual agenda]].
|-
|[[humanism]]
|1808 <ref>http://newhumanist.org.uk/1740</ref>
|
|-
|[[imperialism]]
|1851
|a clever term later used by liberals to interfere with Christian missionaries and stopping anti-Christian tyranny
|-
|[[isolationism]]
|1922
|a pejorative term that is critical of American politicians putting America first in priorities
|-
|Keynesianism
|1946
|advocacy of 'tax and spend' policies as elaborated by the economist [[John Maynard Keynes]]; a [[euphemism]] for back-door [[Socialism]].
|-
|[[Living Constitution]]
|2000
|a continually evolving Constitution (first used by presidential candidate Al Gore, title of a 1936 book by Howard McBain)
|-
|main squeeze
|1968
|one's romantic partner, typically in an unmarried relationship
|-
|McCarthyism
|1950
|originally, investigations by Sen. Joe McCarthy of Communists working in sensitive USA government jobs. Later, it more broadly refers to holding radical leftists accountable for their beliefs and loyalties.
|-
|[[metrosexual]]
|1994
|fashion and glamour man
|-
|moderate
|late 1900s
|the original term dates from the French Revolution, but its meaning today is a euphemism for someone who favors abortion and/or supports censorship of Christianity in some ways.
|-
|[[moving the goalposts]]
|late 1980s
|a sports analogy designed to avoid answering a logical follow-up question; this is a favorite term of evolutionists to avoid addressing obvious deficiencies in their theory
|-
|nationalize
|1800
|a euphemism for the government taking over ownership and control of a large company or entire industry, as in socialism
|-
|natural selection
|1857
|a misleading and euphemistic term for the theory that genetic advantages and conflict dictate survival
|-
|[[Nihilism]]
|1817
|a rejection of the values system, independently anarchist from society norms.
|-
|[[population control]]
|1968
|the issue of population dates back to Confucius. Liberals promoted the term after the book The Population Bomb by Paul R. Ehrlich
|-
|[[pro-choice]]
|1975
|a euphemism for insisting on taxpayer-funded [[abortion]]; people who claim to be pro-choice typically oppose ''informed'' choice, which makes the "choice" meaningless
|-
|[[progressivism]]
|1892
|the progressive movement was not entirely liberal; it was started by a Republican and shared some goals with conservatives, and still does
|-
|[[psychoanalysis]]
|1906
|contributed to de-spiritualization of human beings
|-
|public option
|2009
|obfuscate rewording of government control
|-
|[[quote mining]]
|non-existent
|a term used by [[evolutionists]] to describe taking quotes out of context in order to damage the position of the quoted party.
|-
|reproductive health
|1994 <ref>defined by the United Nations (UN) in 1994 at the Cairo International Conference</ref>
|abortion supporters jargon for rights/justice for pregnant women, no rights/justice for the child.
|-
|[[Sexual Discrimination|sexism]]
|1968
|That which is practiced by those who do not give total support to [[feminism]].
|-
|shovel-ready <ref>[http://skylineviews.typepad.com/skyline_views/2009/04/is-it-time-to-add-shovelready-to-the-dictionary.html Is it time to add shovel-ready to the dictionary? Skyline Views, April 24, 2009]</ref>
|2008
|jobs and people ready to work if funded
|-
|situation ethics
|1955
|a euphemism for denying fixed ethical standards
|-
|stimulus packages
|2009
|used by government(s) to be perceived as taking unprecedented measures to stimulate aggregate economic demand; during a crisis on economic growth and private jobs, liberal government entities are known to deceptively take advantage of its subject in the form of "stimulus packages," as an opportunity to pursue policies that further social and environmental agendas.<ref>[http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/12/62/42555546.pdf For a stronger, cleaner, ''fairer'' world economy], ''Organisation For Economic Co-Operation and Development'' (OECD), 2010.</ref>
|-
|strict liability
|1869
|court-imposed liability even when there is no evidence of any fault by the defendant
|-
|sustainability
|1727
|[[environmentalism|environmentalist]] buzzword
|-
|Swift-Boating
|2004
|allegations of unfair campaign tactics.
|-
|transforming society
|2008
|Obama, Rahm and Axelrod use this term. It dates to [[Saul Alinsky]] and Chicago politics. <ref>[http://marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930# Mark Levin Show, July 7, 2009]</ref>
|-
|transnationalist
|2006
|popularized by Yale Law School Dean Harold Koh in a 2006 law review article: "The transnationalists view domestic courts as having a critical role to play in domesticating international law into U.S. law ...."<ref>Penn State Law Review (2006).</ref>
|-
|undocumented immigrant
|2000
|a [[politically correct]] replacement for illegal alien.
|-
|unfair
|1700
|
|-
|union shop
|1904
|
|-
|[[Unitarian]]
|1687
|
|-
|will to power
|1907
|[[Nietzsche]]'s concept of the drive of a superman to perfect himself by exercising creative power; it didn't catch on
|-
|woman's rights
|1833
|women equal to men; the defining movement to justify aborting babies in the 20th century
|-
|}

== Rate of Generation of Liberal Terms ==

The rate of generation of liberal terms is increasing, but not with the enduring value of the conservative terms and not with their geometric rate of increase. A remarkably high percentage of new liberal terms originated in the 1960s, suggesting that new liberal terms arise in a sporadic manner heavily influenced by culture:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Century
!# New Liberal Terms
|-
|1600s
|4
|-
|1700s
|2
|-
|1800s
|11
|-
|1900s
|31 (9 in the 1960s)
|-
|2000s
|6
|-
|}

== Terms Difficult to Classify ==

These new terms are difficult to classify:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Term
!Origin date
!Comments
|-
|[[affirmative action|affirmative action]]
|1961
|first used in [http://www.thecre.com/fedlaw/legal6/eo10925.htm JFK's Executive Order 10925] in 1961 and subsequently promoted by [[LBJ]].
|-
|[[American exceptionalism]]
|1980<ref>An estimate; it originated no later than 1983.</ref>
|coined by sociologist Daniel Bell, its meaning today is unclear; it is used to urge exporting American-style elections to the rest of the world as urged especially by [[neoconservatives]].
|-
|Americanism
|1781
|Originally, a phrase unique to American English, later, loyalty to America and its principles
|-
|bipartisan
|1909
|emphasized by liberals when they are in the minority in power, but ignored by liberals when they are the majority in power
|-
|colonist
|1701
|settlers of a new country
|-
|compartmentalize
|1925
|compartmentalizing the Bible away from knowledge and education leads to ignorance and despair
|-
|eclectic
|1683
|taking the best from among different styles or ideas; compare [[best of the public]]
|-
|evangelism
|1620-30
|"isms" are usually pejorative, though this acquired a positive meaning over time, and perhaps from the outset
|-
|genetics
|1905
|perhaps this should be on the conservative list?
|-
|inane
|1662
|refers to comments, often made by liberals, that are utterly devoid of substance
|-
|junk legislation
|1980s
|used initially by liberals to complain about the lack of meaningful legislation
|-
|missionary
|1635-1645
|conservative?
|-
|multitasking
|1966
|performing multiple tasks all at once
|-
|polar coordinates
|1694
|Newton may have used it earlier
|-
|republican
|1685
|
|-
|scrooge
|1843
|the main character in Charles Dickens' ''A Christmas Carol''; the story is based on materialism and is often used as a substitute for the Biblical account, but charity is a conservative value
|-
|smoke and mirrors
|1982
|describes the use of deceit, particularly in politics; probably a conservative term, but will await more etymology about it
|-
|soapbox
|1907
|now used pejoratively, but probably not initially when it was a way for the public to participate
|-
|states' rights
|1790
|liberals often invoke this too; Democrats were its biggest champions in the 1800s (in connection with slavery), and even today on issues like legalizing drugs and same-sex marriage
|-
|technocrat
|1932
|technical expert
|-
|telecommute
|1974<ref>The first use of this term was in the British magazine ''The Economist''.</ref>
|a combination of a Greek root ("tele", which means "far off") and a Latin root ("commutare", which means "to exchange")
|-
|tomfoolery
|1812
|playful or foolish behavior
|-
|traditionalism
|1856
|"beliefs of those opposed to [[modernism]], [[liberalism]], or [[radicalism]]"
|-
|[[twilight zone]]
|1949
|the realm of imagination that seems impossible but is difficult to disprove, and which challenges ordinary views of reality; also the terminator between night and day on a planetary body
|-
|wiki
|1995
|a website (or website software) that facilitates contributions and corrections by the public
|-
|}

== Downgraded Conservative Terms ==

These conservative terms are less significant:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Term
!Origin date
!Comments
|-
|byzantine
|1794<ref>The usage here -- in sense of complex governmental rules -- probably developed later.</ref>
|
|-
|eleemosynary
|1616
|relating to charity
|-
|[[entropy]]
|1868
|
|-
|[[filibuster]]
|1851
|
|-
|incandescent
|1794
|bright and radiant, conquering darkness, precursor to the invention of the incandescent lamp (light bulb)
|-
|luddite
|1811
|one who opposes and even destroys technological advances
|-
|media
|1923
|
|-
|[[milquetoast]]
|1933
|timid and unassertive; easily persuaded or exploited
|-
|normalcy
|1920
|related to the election of [[Warren G. Harding]] by the largest margin yet in history
|-
|ne'er-do-well
|1736
|"an idle worthless person" - Merriam-Webster
|-
|reticent
|1834
|restrained in expression, presentation, or appearance
|-
|self-indulgence
|1753
|
|-
|smart aleck
|1856
|an obnoxiously conceited and self-assertive person with pretensions to being superior to others. Etymology: Aleck, nickname for Alexander <ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smart%20alec Smart Aleck Merriam-Websters]</ref>
|-
|}

== Sources ==

*[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ Merriam-Webster dictionary]
*[http://dictionary.reference.com/ Dictionary.com]

== See also ==

*[[Essay:Conservapedia's Law]]
*[[Essay:Surprising Dates of Origin for Terms]]
*[[Linguistic Analysis of Candidates]]
*[[Conservative Bible Project]]

{{Conservatism}}
{{Conservapedia}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}
[[Category:Essays]]
[[Category:Conservative Bible]]
[[Category:Featured articles]]

Talk:Essay:Best New Conservative Words

2010-08-19T03:12:50Z

ChrisGT90: /* 33 million sites turn up in a Google search for "anti-Christian" - Wrong! */

'''[[/archive1 | Archive 1 ]]''' 
'''[[/archive2|Archive 2 ]]'''
----

==Mother Nature==
In the New Liberal Terms section, I put the term Mother Nature in the list. Is it right?--[[User:Willminator|Willminator]] 18:40, 22 April 2010 (EDT)

I won't argue whether or not Mother nature is a liberal term on the grounds that I think the distinction between conservative and liberal words is dubious at best, however it is most certainly not a new word. The idea of mother nature is as old as the ancient greeks or older. --[[User:BenjaminS|Ben]] [[User Talk:BenjaminS|Talk]] 18:46, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

:That's a clever way to dispose of a vexing question.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:56, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

Well I don't want to waste your time by arguing the point Mr. Schlafly. If you want to put the term back in feel free. --[[User:BenjaminS|Ben]] [[User Talk:BenjaminS|Talk]] 19:24, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

How is it dubious? Also, I haven’t heard of any writings or speeches where the term Mother Nature was used hundreds of years ago. Show me at least one speech or writing where the term was used. Liberals use it to discredit Father God’s role in creation. They think that it was nature, not God, who made us. To Liberals, nature is their goddess. Funny how Wikipedia’s article on Mother Nature denies the atheistic, evolutionary and environmental implications of the term.--[[User:Willminator|Willminator]] 19:55, 22 April 2010 (EDT)

:Look up "Gaia" or "Terra Mater" - "Mother Nature" or "Mother Earth" has been around thousands of years. [[User:PaulBurnett|PaulBurnett]] 22:23, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

::The idea of personifying all of nature as a woman surely predates the liberalism of 20th century and early 21st century America. But the way in which the natural world came into existence, specifically the planet Earth which supports all life known to exist, is unknown to science: speculation is not "science" unless expressed as a theory to which a counterexample could conceivably be found (see [[falsifiability]]).

::Those scientists who deny God's role in [[Creation]] are committing the same intellectual offense they accuse [[intelligent design]] theorists of. It is also not "science" to comment on metaphysical ideas, unless we grant that the scientific method can be applied to matters beyond [[physical science]].

::The trick which liberals are playing with their anti-conservative words is to pretend that they are talking about one thing, while they are actually talking about another. This is literally the oldest trick in [[Bible|the book]]; recall that the serpent tempting Eve told her, "You will not die" yet Jesus explained later on many occasions that "life" and "death" correspond to being able or unable to love God. So eating the forbidden fruit did indeed cause Eve's death. (See verses like, "You have the name of being alive, but you are dead" in Revelations and, "Let the dead bury their own dead" in Luke 9)

::We need precise definitions of words, to prevent being tricked and fooled by deceivers with a hidden agenda. The so-called "[[peace movement]]", for example, never wanted [[peace]] but simply the victory of America's anti-[[democracy|democratic]] enemies. The "save the earth" movement is not at all concerned with preserving the environment for the well-being of human beings: it's an excuse to increase centralized control over resources, in a way which will destroy prosperity, hurting the world's poor more than any one else.

::Now it's a matter of personal belief for me that God has a feminine aspect; my church specifically teaches that the [[Holy Spirit]] is feminine, and that God is a being whose harmonized masculinity and femininity are reflected in men and women (see Gen. 1:27) but I won't preach here. The issue is the relationship between Nature and human beings.

::Liberals claim that science has proved [[Evolution]] without providing any evidence for it, let alone discussing a means by which the theory might be falsified (thus providing a highly prominent example of [[pseudoscience]]). Then they misuse this idea to hint that science has also discovered the source of the physical world ([[Big Bang]] theory) and the [[origin of life]]. Of course, when pressed, they must concede that the Theory of Evolution does not tell us how life came into being. But high school biology textbooks write about life as if it simply "evolved" from inorganic chemicals. This, by the way, is a great example of how New Liberal Words are misused to trick people. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 07:10, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

:::That's a fascinating analysis, Ed. Thank you for sharing it. I appreciate the suggestion that the [[Holy Spirit]] is feminine. Usually groups of people, like nations or large audiences, are considered to be more feminine than masculine in nature.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:13, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

== "Bully pulpit" ==

How about "bully pulpit"? When Teddy Roosevelt coined this, "bully" meant something like "excellent" rather than overbearing.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:47, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

I guess it's kind of like the word gay. At first gay meant happy and now it means something else.--[[User:Willminator|Willminator]] 19:55, 22 April 2010 (EDT)

==Definition==

I think this article needs a clear definition of what is meant by "conservative words." As I was reading it, I found it unclear as to whether it's about words invented by Conservatives or words representing Conservative values. I gather it's the latter, but I had to look in the talk page to find that. Either way, the introduction to the article isn't very clear and I'm reluctant to write a definition since I'm not sure I'm on the same page as the contributors. Would someone care to do that? [[User:EMorris|EMorris]] 13:49, 2 June 2010 (EDT)

== 33 million sites turn up in a Google search for "anti-Christian" - Wrong! ==

For the term "anti-Christian" the article claims "thirty-three million sites turn up in a Google search."

Where did this number come from? Go to Google and type in "anti-Christian" (in quotes) and you get 945,000 hits. Type in "anti-Christian" (NOT in quotes - which is totally sloppy Googling) and you get 7,590,000 hits. Where did the "thirty-three million" come from? [[User:PaulBurnett|PaulBurnett]] 22:11, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

: That's an interesting observation, Paul. The number of Google links retrieved for the search "anti-Christian" has fallen substantially. That begs the question of why.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:18, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

::Should we correct that number in the article? [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 22:41, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

:::Please improve as you think best!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:58, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::The user who added that ([[User:DrewDice]]) was subsequently blocked for prevarication. The one-million figure Andy added seems about right in my searches. [[User:KyleDD|KyleDD]] 23:05, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

:::::Before you round the number down, consider rounding it up. [http://www.google.com/search?q=anti+Christian&hl=en&lr=lang_en&as_qdr=all&prmd=inl&sa=X&ei=eQldTN2RGIWBlAeU8uCbCA&ved=0CBEQpwU&source=lnt&tbs=lr:lang_1en,cdr:1,cd_min:,cd_max:] The answer is 74.6 million. Google anti Christian with no quotes, no hyphens, English language only. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 03:24, 7 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::That is true, but such a Google search would include Christian sites about "[[pro-life|anti-abortion]]" stances or "[[homosexuality|anti-Biblical]]" lifestyles. [[User:KyleDD|KyleDD]] 21:43, 17 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::A good indication that my search results are accurate can be judged by the first 10 page results, nothing but anti-Christian in the title. Does it include anti-abortion and anti-American? Possibly, we are talking 78 million pages but I didn't see any through the top 10. I frown on the smaller number of 1 million.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:14, 17 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::I'm sorry you feel that way. A good indication that your search results are inaccurate can be judged by using the "Search within results" function. Half a million of your results pertain to the Christian "anti defamation" commission. Another half million are for "anti abortion". 184,000 deal with "anti immigration". And the list goes on and on...173,000 are about the punk rock band "Anti-flag". I'm sure hundreds of thousands more results are about things that people named Christian don't like. The only way to accurately gauge the use of the phrase "anti Christian" on Google is to search for that phrase, not its components. [[User:KyleDD|KyleDD]] 11:50, 18 August 2010 (EDT)

:::::::::I did a search for anti-Christian both with and without the hyphen when Paul Burnett first brought the issue up, and both returned the same number of hits (about the 7.5 million he mentioned). I think that Jpatt may have misread the number and moved the decimal place over. Even now, I'm only getting 10.8 million hits, both by typing in what Jpatt described or by clicking his link. I'm changing the article now to say 10 million, but I think the number should ultimately be removed. It just changes to quickly for the article to stay up-to-date unless somebody is going to check every morning. Also, on the first page of ten results, on is a list of anti-Christian movies, one is lamenting the anti-Christian bias in America, and one is against anti-Christian defamation. If you want to only use the first 10 results as a sample of the 10 million (which anybody who's taken a statistics course would tell you is a horrible idea), about 30% of those results are nothing hostile towards Christianity. [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 23:12, 18 August 2010 (EDT)

== Adding Obama Portmanteaus ==

I've noticed the list does not have any of the Obama portmanteaus, like [[Obamanation]], [[Obamunism]], etc. Shouldn't these terms be added? They are great for described the unfortunate turn this country is taking. [[User:JonS|JonS]] 17:13, 27 June 2010 (EDT)

== Underdog ==

Conservative term imho. Seeker of greatness against the odds. Cinderella story. David (underdog) slays Goliath. The meek (underdog) shall inherit the Earth. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 03:09, 10 July 2010 (EDT)

: I agree that "underdog" is a conservative term, and I will promote it now. Thanks for mentioning this.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 08:42, 10 July 2010 (EDT)

== Excellent scholarship ==

In the face of such well founded scholarship, Liberals will never manage to disprove the remarkable growth pattern illustrating the doubling per century of Conservative words. Nevertheless, perhaps the essay could be improved slightly by adding that Conservative words are words that express a Conservative concept or words that are used significantly more often by conservatives than Liberals. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 17:20, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

: Not sure what confusion you're trying to clear up here. Conservatives words express insights that are conservative. These words are freely available to liberals and conservatives alike, though liberals may indeed irrationally try (in a fool's errand) to avoid using them.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:34, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

::The essay begins by mentioning Conservative terms, then a list of Conservative words and terms follows, nowhere in the essay is it made clear what Conservative words or terms actually are. That, I think, should occur at the beginning of the essay. Supplying a definition of what a Conservative term is, will underpin the observation that the data supplied irrefutably proves a "1-2-4-8" geometric increase for new conservative terms. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 14:51, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

:::Definition by example seems best here. Other proposed definitions are, of course, welcome.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:35, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

::Other definitions are not required, your own excellent, clear and concise definition that Conservatives words express [[conservative insights]] is more than adequate. However, [[definition]] by [[example]] begs the question, are the words in the list because they are Conservative or are the words Conservative because they are in the list? [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 15:48, 31 July 2010 (EDT)

:::The terms are obviously Conservative independent of being in this list. You wouldn't request a definition for "List of Words beginning with G", so why are you demanding a definition for "Conservative term"? Are the component words of the phrase that obtuse for you? We're not using them in any aberrant way. --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 18:04, 31 July 2010 (EDT)

::::Nowhere did I demand a definition, I merely suggested that providing one would underpin the excellent scholarship presented in the essay. G is a well established concept amongst literate people. "List of Words beginning with G" is a definition, therefore it logically does not require a definition. The term 'Conservative words' is not as well established as G, therefore a definition helps those unfamiliar with the term understand it and benefit from Mr Schlafly's excellent insights. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 16:57, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

:::::What you say cannot be true, because in the world I live in, people know and understand what "conservative" means, and they don't need it spelled out for them. Talking about the "excellent scholarship presented in this essay" smacks of sarcasm from the tone of the rest of your post. If you were a ''real'' conservative, you wouldn't have to be asking what a "conservative word" was. --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 21:29, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

::My suggestion to elaborate was in order to elucidate the term 'Conservative words' not the word 'Conservative'. The elucidation is intended for visitors unfamiliar with the term, not for myself. Many come to Conservapedia seeking an alternative to the atheistic anti-Christian misinformation, gossip and pornography prevalent elsewhere on the internet. Elucidation enables such people to better understand and appreciate what Conservapedia has to offer, and may facillitate bringing them into the fold, so that they may also profit from the many [[Essay:Conservative Benefits|Conservative benefits]]. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 18:01, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

:::If liberals are so devoid of intelligence or honesty to clearly understand the simple application of an adjective to a noun, then why should we dumb down our article just for their pea-sized brains? --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 21:57, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

"AmandaBunting" (if that really is your name), I've reviewed your contributions and you're not doing much more than talk, talk talk. We conservatives favor substantive contributions to this project, so if all you can do is complain on talk pages, Wikipedia might be a better place for you and your misguided ideology. It's obvious you're not here to help anyone learn. [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 18:18, 31 July 2010 (EDT)

:I am neither complaining nor have I a misguided ideology. I am simply making substantive suggestions about how I think this excellent essay may be improved. As a Conservative I would have expected more [[Chivalry|chivalrous]] behaviour here, there is [[Essay:Rules of Chivalry for Students|much you can learn]] from Conservapedia. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 16:57, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

::But you didn't suggest a definition, even though one would have been (and still is) welcome from you. Wikis are not answer boxes; they are places where people contribute ideas and ''substantive'' edits, and then others improve them.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:34, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

:::I had already mentioned that other definitions are not required because you had already supplied supplied an excellent, clear and concise definition that Conservatives words express Conservative insights. I have added that to the essay, furthermore the definition itself links to the insightful article [[Conservative insights]]. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 17:38, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

== Maggie Thatcher ==

Great article. How about some of Margaret Thatcher's great new conservative terms:
* U-turn: What liberal politicians do all the time
* There is no alternative: Liberals pretend that they have an alternative to conservative values
* Oxygen of publicity: What liberals want to give to terrorists
* Fight to win: What conservatives should do!
[[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 19:03, 14 July 2010 (EDT)
:Get this! Adding those four terms takes the total for the 20th century to 160 - we're getting very close to a perfect geometric progression. [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 19:07, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

:: Thanks for the suggestions, but I'm not sure the above terms meet the high quality level of the entries. Perhaps because "Maggie" was actually not very conservative by American standards? She seemed fine with nationalized health care, for example.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:29, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

== Possibility ==

''quack'', coined 1638, to refer to charlatans deceiving others with pseudoscience. Used extensively today to describe the favorite "medicines" of new-age liberals. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 20:40, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

: Interesting and informative suggestion. However, the term strikes me as name-calling rather than insightful. I'm not sure its use would be consistent with our rules!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:26, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

== Kiss of Death ==

The term "Kiss of Death" clearly originated earlier than 1943, as the article would suggest, as there was [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiss_of_Death_%281916_film%29 a 1916 film by that name]. In fact, I'm not convinced this was the origin of the term, which has probably been in use since Judas' betrayal. [[User:DanieleGiusto|DanieleGiusto]] 22:01, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

: Your link to Wikipedia is broken, and the movie was probably a literal rather than figurative use of the word. Merriam-Webster gives a date of 1943.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:24, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

::Fixed the link; thanks for the heads-up. [[User:DanieleGiusto|DanieleGiusto]] 13:38, 16 July 2010 (EDT)
-

== Possibility for 1800's: Carpetbagger ==

While the term originally related specifically to northern politicians interjecting themselves into the politics of the Reconstruction-era south, it has since come to be used for political opportunists in a more general sense. Since this sort of behavior is common among Democrats (Hillary Clinton, anyone?) I'd argue that the term has value as a conservative word. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 12:52, 19 July 2010 (EDT)

: "Carpetbagger" is a fascinating suggestion. [[Hillary Clinton]] and [[Robert F. Kennedy]] were modern senatorial examples. Perhaps there are other modern examples also.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:45, 19 July 2010 (EDT)

:::Well...hmm. There's John Garamendi, the former lieutenant governor of California, who ran for election to the House in a district where he didn't live. His defense, as I recall, was "Well, I don't live there, but my front yard's in the district." (It wasn't.) --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 17:26, 19 July 2010 (EDT)

== Research method ==

I just wanted to point out that actively looking for words to fit the geometric rate of growth, from a scientific point of view, is a biased method of research. You will ALWAYS find words in a 1-2-4-8 geometric growth rate, if that's what you actively look for. A more neutral research method would be to ***randomly*** (I can't stress it enough, it MUST be random) pick up, say, 1000 words created after 1600, and see if they match that growth rate.

This method CAN lead to a scientific result, mind you, but only after ALL words created after 1600 have been taken into account, whether they match the growth rate or not. Feel free to refute my reasoning if I made a logical flaw in it, and if you think that actively choosing words to fit a 1-2-4-8 growth rate has scientific validity, please explain me why I am wrong. Thank you! --[[User:MarcoT2|MarcoT2]] 11:35, 20 July 2010 (EDT)

== Suggestion? ==

What does everyone else think about ''militant atheist''? I had to listen to someone rail at me for being a Christian on the train this morning '''for an hour''' and it got me thinking. I've been hearing the term since I was a kid, but that would probably fall into the 20th century. William Ayers anyone? My argument in favor is that most of them try to pass themselves off as peaceful, tolerant, etc, when (only my opinion here) that isn't really the case. We should call it as we see it here. I can't provide a year, but maybe someone with more experience can? What do you think? [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 13:23, 20 July 2010 (EDT)

== Selection Bias and Proposal for an Unbiased Test ==

===Selection bias===
The easiest way to see this is the history of your finds: You have repeatedly achieved what you call a perfect layer (1-2-4-8) of new conservative words, i.e. 1 word of the 17th century, 2 of the 18th century, 4 of the 19th century and 8 of the 20th century.

What's the probability to get a perfect layer? Here are the probabilities for the century of origin of a random conservative words, assuming that your insight is correct: 

<table><tr><th>Century</th><th>Probability</th></tr><tr><td>17th</td><td>1/15</td></tr><tr><td>18th</td><td>2/15</td></tr><tr><td>19th</td><td>4/15</td></tr><tr><td>20th</td><td>8/15</td></tr></table>

For a layer, we have to take 15 words. It's easy to calculate the probability that these 15 words form a perfect layer:

15!/(8!×4!×2!×1!) × (1/15)1 × (2/15)2 × (4/15)4 × (8/15)8 = 675675 × 234 / 1515 =0.0265

2.65% is the probability to chose 15 words and get a perfect layer instead of 2-1-4-8 or 1-2-5-7... And how often was this remarkable deed performed?

That you were able to repeat this process for a couple of times shows that you were actively (though not necessarily consciously) looking for words to match your pattern, i.e., you showed a selection bias - a kind of affirmative action for newer words...

: Selection bias exists in any study. The issue is not whether there is selection bias (there always is), but whether the selection bias is so great that it disqualifies the results. Unless there were a strong underlying pattern of increase by century, it would be almost impossible even with high selection bias to attain the resulting pattern of doubling by century.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:51, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

::*''Selection bias exists in any study. '' But most scientists try to avoid it (even in the social sciences), and try to monitor its effect. They most certainly should not embrace it as a way to make their point (that is, they are called on it when they do so...)
::*''Unless there were a strong underlying pattern of increase by century, it would be almost impossible even with high selection bias to attain the resulting pattern of doubling by century.'' But [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law|Conservapedia's Law]] doesn't claim that ''their is a increase by century''. No, it explicitly states that ''conservative insights increase over time at a geometric rate, as in 1-2-4-8-16-etc. For example, there is a doubling in effective new conservative terms per century.'' While their may an increase over the centuries, the rate of this increase (doubling, i.e. an increase by 100% by century) is an artefact of the way you perform your search: That is, even if the real rate is 70% , 130% - or 83% (the [[maximum likelihood estimator]] for your current set of words taken into account the year of their creation), you end up with a perfect fit of 100% - unless you have enumerated ''all'' conservative words at least for one century.
::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:44, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

===An unbiased test===
Andy, f you are interested in testing your insight, I really would like to help you. The hidden table below contains 500 words which - according to the Merriam-Webster - originated between 1600 and 2000. The list was generated by taking words of the ubuntu-dictionary at random and checking their age automatically via the site of Merriam-Webster. This was repeated until 500 feasible words were found. 

If you mark each conservative word with an "r" (and perhaps each liberal word with an "l"), we'll get an estimate of the percentage of conservative words - and a fairly unbiased distribution over the time.

Please be aware that the distribution of this sample doesn't follow a geometric law. Here are the number of words by century of origin:
<table><tr><th>Century</th><th>Number of Words</th></tr><tr><td>17th</td><td>151</td></tr><tr><td>18th</td><td>84</td></tr><tr><td>19th</td><td>161</td></tr><tr><td>20th</td><td>104</td></tr></table>

: Your proposed test is an interesting one, and I do see far more conservative words from the 1700s than the 1600s. Indeed, I'm pleasantly surprised how many conservative words show up in your random selection, as I never claimed that conservative (or liberal) words were a substantial percentage of all new words generated.

:That said, the defect in your proposed test is the weakness in dictionaries publishing more recent new conservative words from, say, the 1900s. Dictionaries are good at defining old words, but not-so-good at recognizing and defining relatively new concepts. That's what we need Conservapedia for! :-).--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:07, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

::*''That said, the defect in your proposed test is the weakness in dictionaries publishing more recent new conservative words from, say, the 1900s. '' That's hardly a fatal flaw which would render the test useless. But we can even circumvent it: Let's just concentrate on the period 1600-1899! As you acknowledge that ''dictionaries are good at defining old words'', in the next list you will find 500 words from these three centuries. I assume that [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law|Conservapedia's Law]] should hold not only for the 20th and the 21st century. (the list is a wikitable with two columns, just add a marker for a conservative word in the second column. I omitted the years of the creation of the words (all taken from the Merriam-Webster) and I would advice you against checking the age before marking a word - though of course the age of quite a few words is apparent)
::*A dictionary is the obvious choice when talking about the number of words. But you are absolutely right that dictionaries are biased towards older words. I assume that the percentage of words in general use which were created in the 20th century is much higher than those of the 17th century! When one is interested only in the distribution of conservative words , one could sample over Conservapedia's articles, and try various methods to get the age of the newest words used. But this is of course more cumbersome than just looking into a dictionary, so I'll postpone it for a while.
::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:47, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

===Table of random words===
{|class="collapsible collapsed"
!500 words
|-
|1 economics
2 storeroom
3 hunkers
4 sufficing
5 coffeehouses
6 stalagmites
7 therapy
8 sanitation
9 cheapskates
10 Caesareans
11 ringmaster
12 acclimate
13 penology
14 verandah
15 caregivers
16 fed
17 disengaged
18 whitecaps
19 dissertation
20 consignment
21 chainsaws
22 speeds
23 kinfolk
24 caribous
25 hobbyists
26 coefficients
27 protuberance
28 morphemes
29 Caroline
30 millionaires
31 recyclable
32 wilts
33 unreconstructed
34 chandeliers
35 palomino
36 joysticks
37 volleys
38 cajoling
39 bucksaws
40 spars
41 portaged
42 acoustically
43 humanize
44 hybridize
45 tipsters
46 overprices
47 marksmanship
48 fezes
49 depressant
50 auctioned
51 flamethrower
52 biking
53 artistic
54 agribusiness
55 jottings
56 pedicures
57 Cordilleras
58 slots
59 recording
60 unrealistic
61 rationalism
62 peacekeeping
63 aromatherapy
64 jackknife
65 champagne
66 horrendous
67 Quasimodo
68 excavator
69 chowders
70 arts
71 configure
72 civic
73 telegraphy
74 sweepstakes
75 euphoric
76 strategy
77 subgroup
78 shouting
79 gusher
80 telemarketing
81 glucose
82 booties
83 preponderated
84 manures
85 outspokenness
86 wiener
87 embeds
88 amped
89 sternums
90 empathy
91 cognomina
92 colitis
93 kimono
94 retched
95 singletons
96 megaphoned
97 respelled
98 Hindus
99 squiggle
100 irrigates
101 reconstructions
102 deceptiveness
103 colonialism
104 missioned
105 dyes
106 maladroit
107 tents
108 turfs
109 generalization
110 seamanship
111 duffers
112 scruffier
113 pollinate
114 bobcats
115 achieved
116 exerted
117 flapjack
118 Independence
119 lucidity
120 indenturing
121 enumerable
122 disenchanted
123 flashback
124 trilogies
125 colloquially
126 Colby
127 killjoys
128 lifelines
129 hydrotherapy
130 psychoanalysis
131 memorializing
132 bronchitis
133 rink
134 automobiles
135 dandy
136 schoolmarms
137 debriefing
138 glands
139 oceanography
140 jetted
141 hurdler
142 dependability
143 tactician
144 rotor
145 liturgies
146 quantified
147 wests
148 quitters
149 ocarinas
150 betting
151 apathetically
152 smoggier
153 Xenia
154 saris
155 dupe
156 voodooism
157 optimize
158 particularization
159 funereally
160 masterminding
161 capsizes
162 orchestrates
163 uncivilized
164 emphasized
165 skyrocket
166 plagiarist
167 politicoes
168 streptococci
169 pantsuits
170 waving
171 decontaminates
172 teensy
173 taxonomy
174 proselytizes
175 drollness
176 expectoration
177 legmen
178 modulations
179 diploma
180 Brandy
181 radar
182 pushiest
183 drill
184 lush
185 temperas
186 musicals
187 wheal
188 horticulture
189 cancan
190 jocularity
191 caramels
192 bipolar
193 sophisticated
194 injudicious
195 emulsion
196 ignore
197 cannonballed
198 swastika
199 overachievers
200 rubella
201 chuckhole
202 ersatz
203 breeziness
204 climaxes
205 explosiveness
206 empathizing
207 jumps
208 secularizing
209 sequoia
210 bibliography
211 prettying
212 bouldered
213 authorship
214 vocalizing
215 tarpons
216 camisoles
217 cowpox
218 tans
219 breathable
220 machines
221 tycoon
222 flicking
223 squishes
224 semiprofessional
225 feline
226 seedling
227 hankie
228 entitlement
229 abscissa
230 derisive
231 romance
232 overprice
233 beads
234 stipple
235 Kitty
236 jewelled
237 mascaraed
238 dissociation
239 moments
240 Spica
241 quaking
242 legislation
243 wobbly
244 scorches
245 books
246 gastrointestinal
247 finked
248 renegotiates
249 flautists
250 wrongheadedness
251 allergenic
252 squishiest
253 kickoffs
254 mecca
255 disses
256 woodwinds
257 discotheques
258 replacements
259 tomahawks
260 voluptuaries
261 salon
262 eliciting
263 resale
264 soporific
265 dosage
266 smokestacks
267 rationalists
268 subsumed
269 futzes
270 minutemen
271 stingrays
272 marathoner
273 vagina
274 propellers
275 rooftops
276 sensationalist
277 bluejackets
278 individualize
279 hyphenating
280 Xanthippe
281 federated
282 amortize
283 airfare
284 hyphenates
285 syncopates
286 sermonizing
287 biochemistry
288 babysat
289 yellows
290 riskier
291 cassocks
292 stated
293 Cordoba
294 Slinky
295 eventfully
296 nines
297 blabbermouths
298 fraternizes
299 bucked
300 Boolean
301 bivalve
302 ricochetted
303 toys
304 toted
305 commissars
306 cushioning
307 redeploy
308 poignancy
309 variegating
310 snuffbox
311 stoplight
312 biochemists
313 bicycling
314 disenfranchised
315 nosing
316 enlightenment
317 knockout
318 resurgent
319 pediments
320 skyscrapers
321 treatments
322 polio
323 flashbulbs
324 empower
325 rounding
326 pervasive
327 humped
328 oxymora
329 freebie
330 passageway
331 barfing
332 motorists
333 triglycerides
334 Mayans
335 stopped
336 kidnapper
337 pensioning
338 foreclosures
339 Yankees
340 manifestoing
341 predictor
342 Delawares
343 librettos
344 panoply
345 angstroms
346 jodhpurs
347 backpedal
348 sugars
349 preclude
350 unravelling
351 Lilliput
352 motivator
353 enslavement
354 pencilling
355 flukey
356 amoral
357 depository
358 unemotional
359 stumpy
360 cartons
361 gal
362 ignitions
363 malingered
364 spotlighted
365 photographic
366 abnegated
367 dashing
368 atrocious
369 inanities
370 derricks
371 mountaineer
372 inseminate
373 sacrosanct
374 modernize
375 specializations
376 obliging
377 heckles
378 baccalaureates
379 bluebirds
380 lengthiest
381 octets
382 physiotherapist
383 disorganizing
384 toffees
385 unfurling
386 abnegate
387 bathrobe
388 socked
389 crepe
390 polkas
391 overwriting
392 punned
393 platoons
394 infrared
395 ensuring
396 decimate
397 baggiest
398 plungers
399 trampolining
400 centigram
401 Topsy
402 epochal
403 boogies
404 showrooms
405 pianofortes
406 Orphic
407 logbooks
408 amphibious
409 rapprochements
410 terms
411 Kalmyk
412 petering
413 geocentric
414 stills
415 ethnologist
416 exec
417 flairs
418 likableness
419 rods
420 melange
421 graduated
422 ante
423 voluminously
424 impaled
425 cognacs
426 yups
427 comfiest
428 strychnine
429 subsoiled
430 conics
431 Salish
432 windsocks
433 rutabaga
434 vacuumed
435 maestri
436 podiatrist
437 restructured
438 metrically
439 motorcade
440 zipping
441 unmoral
442 electioneered
443 minibikes
444 trillion
445 sudsier
446 actuator
447 acing
448 masochism
449 softeners
450 cocksucker
451 brig
452 verbs
453 buccaneer
454 confessed
455 filibustered
456 rearmed
457 melodramatics
458 swivelled
459 veggies
460 monochrome
461 hellos
462 escalators
463 Seyfert
464 bushwhack
465 encapsulation
466 combining
467 realists
468 playgrounds
469 teenage
470 glandular
471 tot
472 cyclical
473 tinsmith
474 commitment
475 undersells
476 orthopaedics
477 yardstick
478 Vivian
479 peppy
480 swatted
481 earlobes
482 snapshots
483 nitpicker
484 unities
485 depressants
486 briefing
487 halo
488 watermarking
489 electronics
490 inadequates
491 ghosted
492 rapscallions
493 snorkeler
494 percentages
495 relapsing
496 facet
497 inconsistently
498 takeout
499 acidify
500 password
|}
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:15, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

'''Second table: 500 random words 1600-1899'''
{|class="wikitable sortable collapsible collapsed"
!word
!date
!class
|-
|monsignor||align="right"|1607||C
|-
|productive||align="right"|1612||C
|-
|alertly||align="right"|1618||C
|-
|inconsistent||align="right"|1620||C
|-
|numerical||align="right"|1628||C
|-
|interlock||align="right"|1632||C
|-
|platoons||align="right"|1637||C
|-
|forevermore||align="right"|1641||C
|-
|identification||align="right"|1644||C
|-
|untenable||align="right"|1647||C
|-
|reversible||align="right"|1648||C
|-
|authentication||align="right"|1652||C
|-
|monotheistic||align="right"|1660||C
|-
|constructive||align="right"|1680||C
|-
|alphabetize||align="right"|1691||C
|-
|misconduct||align="right"|1705||C
|-
|propagandists||align="right"|1718||C
|-
|revelations||align="right"|1729||C
|-
|guaranteed||align="right"|1731||C
|-
|cohesiveness||align="right"|1731||C
|-
|systematizing||align="right"|1767||C
|-
|letdown||align="right"|1768||C
|-
|dissident||align="right"|1769||C
|-
|diagramming||align="right"|1785||C
|-
|backhanded||align="right"|1800||C
|-
|autocratically||align="right"|1823||C
|-
|socialistic||align="right"|1827||C
|-
|Mormonisms||align="right"|1830||C
|-
|westernize||align="right"|1837||C
|-
|trademarks||align="right"|1838||C
|-
|propagandized||align="right"|1844||C
|-
|graffito||align="right"|1851||C
|-
|Americans||align="right"|1855||C
|-
|optimize||align="right"|1857||C
|-
|outdistancing||align="right"|1857||C
|-
|rogues||align="right"|1859||C
|-
|birthrates||align="right"|1859||C
|-
|slob||align="right"|1861||C
|-
|quantifier||align="right"|1876||C
|-
|implode||align="right"|1881||C
|-
|housemother||align="right"|1882||C
|-
|scantier||align="right"|1600||
|-
|sierras||align="right"|1600||
|-
|arena||align="right"|1600||
|-
|toddled||align="right"|1600||
|-
|eventful||align="right"|1600||
|-
|catheter||align="right"|1601||
|-
|primarily||align="right"|1601||
|-
|labeling||align="right"|1601||
|-
|copings||align="right"|1601||
|-
|Pooh||align="right"|1602||
|-
|respectively||align="right"|1602||
|-
|embroiling||align="right"|1603||
|-
|haloes||align="right"|1603||
|-
|Iliad||align="right"|1603||
|-
|enthusiasm||align="right"|1603||
|-
|dragoons||align="right"|1604||
|-
|promised||align="right"|1604||
|-
|recollecting||align="right"|1604||
|-
|stentorian||align="right"|1605||
|-
|rivaling||align="right"|1605||
|-
|impregnates||align="right"|1605||
|-
|touchy||align="right"|1605||
|-
|impassive||align="right"|1605||
|-
|immediacy||align="right"|1605||
|-
|literary||align="right"|1605||
|-
|animosities||align="right"|1605||
|-
|volatile||align="right"|1605||
|-
|vegetates||align="right"|1605||
|-
|acclaiming||align="right"|1606||
|-
|onlooker||align="right"|1606||
|-
|sides||align="right"|1606||
|-
|wisher||align="right"|1607||
|-
|melancholia||align="right"|1607||
|-
|tab||align="right"|1607||
|-
|typical||align="right"|1609||
|-
|casuist||align="right"|1609||
|-
|bucolic||align="right"|1609||
|-
|footfalls||align="right"|1610||
|-
|bison||align="right"|1611||
|-
|lambing||align="right"|1611||
|-
|ticketed||align="right"|1611||
|-
|incompatibilities||align="right"|1611||
|-
|demonstrators||align="right"|1611||
|-
|reproduces||align="right"|1611||
|-
|longish||align="right"|1611||
|-
|amalgamations||align="right"|1612||
|-
|bailing||align="right"|1613||
|-
|caste||align="right"|1613||
|-
|convulses||align="right"|1614||
|-
|abscess||align="right"|1615||
|-
|valise||align="right"|1615||
|-
|cult||align="right"|1617||
|-
|hesitancy||align="right"|1617||
|-
|drill||align="right"|1619||
|-
|blotchy||align="right"|1619||
|-
|urban||align="right"|1619||
|-
|appositeness||align="right"|1621||
|-
|ingratiated||align="right"|1621||
|-
|ingrate||align="right"|1622||
|-
|diplomata||align="right"|1622||
|-
|exporters||align="right"|1623||
|-
|drolly||align="right"|1623||
|-
|adrift||align="right"|1624||
|-
|powwow||align="right"|1624||
|-
|oaf||align="right"|1625||
|-
|preconceptions||align="right"|1625||
|-
|ruse||align="right"|1625||
|-
|abominating||align="right"|1628||
|-
|dodo||align="right"|1628||
|-
|discriminated||align="right"|1628||
|-
|biassing||align="right"|1628||
|-
|enslaved||align="right"|1628||
|-
|backwaters||align="right"|1629||
|-
|palindromic||align="right"|1629||
|-
|palindromes||align="right"|1629||
|-
|tussles||align="right"|1629||
|-
|correspondents||align="right"|1630||
|-
|underrates||align="right"|1632||
|-
|underrate||align="right"|1632||
|-
|characterized||align="right"|1633||
|-
|etcher||align="right"|1634||
|-
|labium||align="right"|1634||
|-
|fluctuates||align="right"|1634||
|-
|morocco||align="right"|1634||
|-
|circumnavigated||align="right"|1634||
|-
|Anglican||align="right"|1635||
|-
|graphically||align="right"|1637||
|-
|millenniums||align="right"|1638||
|-
|domesticating||align="right"|1639||
|-
|pharmaceutical||align="right"|1640||
|-
|onus||align="right"|1640||
|-
|feints||align="right"|1644||
|-
|scavenge||align="right"|1644||
|-
|malls||align="right"|1644||
|-
|salaciously||align="right"|1645||
|-
|additional||align="right"|1646||
|-
|nonuser||align="right"|1646||
|-
|predisposing||align="right"|1646||
|-
|temperamentally||align="right"|1646||
|-
|invigorate||align="right"|1646||
|-
|protuberances||align="right"|1646||
|-
|disinclines||align="right"|1647||
|-
|castanet||align="right"|1647||
|-
|piloting||align="right"|1649||
|-
|leniently||align="right"|1652||
|-
|melange||align="right"|1653||
|-
|dialling||align="right"|1653||
|-
|naively||align="right"|1654||
|-
|siesta||align="right"|1655||
|-
|collectives||align="right"|1655||
|-
|quibbles||align="right"|1656||
|-
|dawdler||align="right"|1656||
|-
|cosmologies||align="right"|1656||
|-
|cosmology||align="right"|1656||
|-
|morbid||align="right"|1656||
|-
|inconvenienced||align="right"|1656||
|-
|numerating||align="right"|1657||
|-
|incapacitate||align="right"|1657||
|-
|overwrite||align="right"|1658||
|-
|horrendous||align="right"|1659||
|-
|tableau||align="right"|1660||
|-
|derisively||align="right"|1662||
|-
|disk||align="right"|1664||
|-
|diverging||align="right"|1665||
|-
|rotundity||align="right"|1665||
|-
|cultivators||align="right"|1665||
|-
|maroon||align="right"|1666||
|-
|stunning||align="right"|1667||
|-
|interleave||align="right"|1668||
|-
|globes||align="right"|1668||
|-
|hick||align="right"|1669||
|-
|realty||align="right"|1670||
|-
|belated||align="right"|1670||
|-
|punning||align="right"|1670||
|-
|haphazardly||align="right"|1671||
|-
|wader||align="right"|1673||
|-
|resilient||align="right"|1674||
|-
|auk||align="right"|1674||
|-
|priggish||align="right"|1676||
|-
|bungalow||align="right"|1676||
|-
|masqueraded||align="right"|1677||
|-
|configuring||align="right"|1677||
|-
|masterstroke||align="right"|1679||
|-
|yaws||align="right"|1679||
|-
|ganglions||align="right"|1681||
|-
|kidnaps||align="right"|1682||
|-
|shivery||align="right"|1683||
|-
|whaler||align="right"|1684||
|-
|bewilder||align="right"|1684||
|-
|roughshod||align="right"|1688||
|-
|bluebird||align="right"|1688||
|-
|toothbrushes||align="right"|1690||
|-
|romance||align="right"|1690||
|-
|adeptness||align="right"|1691||
|-
|dowsing||align="right"|1691||
|-
|processioned||align="right"|1691||
|-
|missioned||align="right"|1692||
|-
|vessels||align="right"|1694||
|-
|flabbiness||align="right"|1694||
|-
|penmanship||align="right"|1695||
|-
|Ojibwa||align="right"|1700||
|-
|actualized||align="right"|1701||
|-
|established||align="right"|1702||
|-
|copped||align="right"|1704||
|-
|liability||align="right"|1705||
|-
|sniggers||align="right"|1706||
|-
|dyspeptic||align="right"|1706||
|-
|crunch||align="right"|1706||
|-
|hibiscuses||align="right"|1706||
|-
|stencil||align="right"|1707||
|-
|quadruplet||align="right"|1709||
|-
|primness||align="right"|1709||
|-
|stocks||align="right"|1709||
|-
|leaseholds||align="right"|1710||
|-
|rheumatic||align="right"|1711||
|-
|papilla||align="right"|1713||
|-
|presentiments||align="right"|1714||
|-
|tantrum||align="right"|1714||
|-
|needling||align="right"|1715||
|-
|impersonating||align="right"|1715||
|-
|settees||align="right"|1716||
|-
|hustling||align="right"|1720||
|-
|unassuming||align="right"|1722||
|-
|Houyhnhnm||align="right"|1726||
|-
|knotholes||align="right"|1726||
|-
|Lilliput||align="right"|1726||
|-
|soporifics||align="right"|1727||
|-
|Shinto||align="right"|1727||
|-
|bludgeons||align="right"|1730||
|-
|pillboxes||align="right"|1730||
|-
|pantheistic||align="right"|1732||
|-
|vampires||align="right"|1732||
|-
|palaver||align="right"|1735||
|-
|Stilton||align="right"|1736||
|-
|incriminates||align="right"|1736||
|-
|philanders||align="right"|1737||
|-
|exiled||align="right"|1737||
|-
|coterie||align="right"|1738||
|-
|cantaloupe||align="right"|1739||
|-
|wham||align="right"|1739||
|-
|swipe||align="right"|1739||
|-
|icings||align="right"|1740||
|-
|segueing||align="right"|1740||
|-
|insulates||align="right"|1741||
|-
|flatiron||align="right"|1743||
|-
|uncharacteristic||align="right"|1748||
|-
|cornmeal||align="right"|1749||
|-
|develop||align="right"|1750||
|-
|spindling||align="right"|1750||
|-
|measurements||align="right"|1751||
|-
|pompon||align="right"|1751||
|-
|fanciers||align="right"|1751||
|-
|lumberyard||align="right"|1753||
|-
|riffles||align="right"|1754||
|-
|personification||align="right"|1755||
|-
|mesquites||align="right"|1759||
|-
|maniacs||align="right"|1763||
|-
|pronouncing||align="right"|1764||
|-
|frivolity||align="right"|1764||
|-
|aboriginals||align="right"|1767||
|-
|Afghans||align="right"|1767||
|-
|paws||align="right"|1769||
|-
|mynas||align="right"|1769||
|-
|modernization||align="right"|1770||
|-
|coagulants||align="right"|1770||
|-
|hairpin||align="right"|1771||
|-
|fagged||align="right"|1772||
|-
|Ta||align="right"|1772||
|-
|propertied||align="right"|1772||
|-
|fagging||align="right"|1772||
|-
|pups||align="right"|1773||
|-
|gibbon||align="right"|1774||
|-
|gecko||align="right"|1774||
|-
|passé||align="right"|1775||
|-
|clannish||align="right"|1776||
|-
|gnu||align="right"|1777||
|-
|gasses||align="right"|1779||
|-
|balalaika||align="right"|1780||
|-
|congressman||align="right"|1780||
|-
|fumigate||align="right"|1781||
|-
|varying||align="right"|1781||
|-
|minutiae||align="right"|1782||
|-
|effervesce||align="right"|1784||
|-
|bangle||align="right"|1787||
|-
|letups||align="right"|1787||
|-
|thyroids||align="right"|1787||
|-
|loots||align="right"|1788||
|-
|Hollands||align="right"|1788||
|-
|Dolly||align="right"|1790||
|-
|weakfish||align="right"|1791||
|-
|rutabagas||align="right"|1791||
|-
|equalizer||align="right"|1792||
|-
|steeplechase||align="right"|1793||
|-
|daredevils||align="right"|1794||
|-
|commentated||align="right"|1794||
|-
|embeds||align="right"|1794||
|-
|telegraphy||align="right"|1795||
|-
|soled||align="right"|1795||
|-
|allover||align="right"|1796||
|-
|titanium||align="right"|1796||
|-
|quizzically||align="right"|1797||
|-
|stashes||align="right"|1797||
|-
|kilogram||align="right"|1797||
|-
|belittled||align="right"|1797||
|-
|Mon||align="right"|1798||
|-
|bibliographies||align="right"|1802||
|-
|fezes||align="right"|1803||
|-
|dressmaking||align="right"|1803||
|-
|condoned||align="right"|1805||
|-
|coarsening||align="right"|1805||
|-
|gumbos||align="right"|1805||
|-
|peewee||align="right"|1806||
|-
|lassos||align="right"|1807||
|-
|Pueblos||align="right"|1808||
|-
|blinder||align="right"|1809||
|-
|eddied||align="right"|1810||
|-
|scurrying||align="right"|1810||
|-
|milliliter||align="right"|1810||
|-
|miffed||align="right"|1811||
|-
|quintet||align="right"|1811||
|-
|aluminum||align="right"|1812||
|-
|shawling||align="right"|1812||
|-
|tossup||align="right"|1812||
|-
|opalescent||align="right"|1813||
|-
|vocalic||align="right"|1814||
|-
|Swahili||align="right"|1814||
|-
|nocturnes||align="right"|1814||
|-
|underpaying||align="right"|1817||
|-
|diarist||align="right"|1818||
|-
|intellectualizes||align="right"|1819||
|-
|stethoscope||align="right"|1820||
|-
|bloodstain||align="right"|1820||
|-
|squawk||align="right"|1821||
|-
|suffragist||align="right"|1822||
|-
|caffeine||align="right"|1823||
|-
|flysheet||align="right"|1825||
|-
|augmented||align="right"|1825||
|-
|subway||align="right"|1825||
|-
|crotchety||align="right"|1825||
|-
|pullout||align="right"|1825||
|-
|beadier||align="right"|1826||
|-
|mammal||align="right"|1826||
|-
|chaffed||align="right"|1827||
|-
|clinics||align="right"|1827||
|-
|recruitment||align="right"|1828||
|-
|mas||align="right"|1829||
|-
|mesmerizing||align="right"|1829||
|-
|constitutionals||align="right"|1829||
|-
|cahoots||align="right"|1829||
|-
|homeopathic||align="right"|1830||
|-
|pterodactyl||align="right"|1830||
|-
|cadres||align="right"|1830||
|-
|hex||align="right"|1830||
|-
|chipmunks||align="right"|1832||
|-
|Horus||align="right"|1832||
|-
|toothpastes||align="right"|1832||
|-
|cottonmouths||align="right"|1832||
|-
|underplays||align="right"|1833||
|-
|dorsals||align="right"|1834||
|-
|cetaceans||align="right"|1835||
|-
|wholeheartedly||align="right"|1836||
|-
|creepily||align="right"|1836||
|-
|étude||align="right"|1837||
|-
|Confucianism||align="right"|1837||
|-
|scatting||align="right"|1838||
|-
|smokestacks||align="right"|1838||
|-
|pretzel||align="right"|1838||
|-
|upheaval||align="right"|1838||
|-
|Bunker||align="right"|1839||
|-
|mushier||align="right"|1839||
|-
|bushings||align="right"|1839||
|-
|OK||align="right"|1839||
|-
|mesa||align="right"|1840||
|-
|wastrel||align="right"|1841||
|-
|pyromaniac||align="right"|1842||
|-
|Assam||align="right"|1842||
|-
|Spitz||align="right"|1842||
|-
|wisteria||align="right"|1842||
|-
|cubbyhole||align="right"|1842||
|-
|kinkiest||align="right"|1844||
|-
|Limoges||align="right"|1844||
|-
|taillights||align="right"|1844||
|-
|subgroups||align="right"|1845||
|-
|garnisheeing||align="right"|1846||
|-
|Joe||align="right"|1846||
|-
|tobogganed||align="right"|1846||
|-
|snobby||align="right"|1846||
|-
|strapless||align="right"|1846||
|-
|cheekily||align="right"|1846||
|-
|orgiastic||align="right"|1846||
|-
|funnest||align="right"|1846||
|-
|tactlessness||align="right"|1847||
|-
|tailcoats||align="right"|1847||
|-
|gynecologists||align="right"|1847||
|-
|cartography||align="right"|1847||
|-
|tenderfeet||align="right"|1849||
|-
|laterals||align="right"|1851||
|-
|educations||align="right"|1851||
|-
|trunks||align="right"|1851||
|-
|hangars||align="right"|1852||
|-
|colloids||align="right"|1852||
|-
|delimits||align="right"|1852||
|-
|delimited||align="right"|1852||
|-
|davenport||align="right"|1853||
|-
|Russians||align="right"|1854||
|-
|abnormality||align="right"|1854||
|-
|rainfall||align="right"|1854||
|-
|Brewer||align="right"|1855||
|-
|hazings||align="right"|1855||
|-
|vendetta||align="right"|1855||
|-
|pullouts||align="right"|1855||
|-
|warlords||align="right"|1856||
|-
|seismographs||align="right"|1858||
|-
|interbreeding||align="right"|1859||
|-
|emulsification||align="right"|1859||
|-
|pub||align="right"|1859||
|-
|soulfulness||align="right"|1860||
|-
|Darwinian||align="right"|1860||
|-
|flautist||align="right"|1860||
|-
|pipelines||align="right"|1860||
|-
|ewe||align="right"|1861||
|-
|bellboy||align="right"|1861||
|-
|trapezes||align="right"|1861||
|-
|ewes||align="right"|1861||
|-
|railroading||align="right"|1862||
|-
|isomorphic||align="right"|1862||
|-
|canapé||align="right"|1863||
|-
|columns||align="right"|1863||
|-
|octets||align="right"|1864||
|-
|coffeecakes||align="right"|1865||
|-
|goulash||align="right"|1866||
|-
|sudsier||align="right"|1866||
|-
|maverick||align="right"|1867||
|-
|safaris||align="right"|1868||
|-
|rangier||align="right"|1868||
|-
|mailbox||align="right"|1868||
|-
|rotting||align="right"|1870||
|-
|saprophyte||align="right"|1870||
|-
|agenda||align="right"|1871||
|-
|roomers||align="right"|1871||
|-
|masterminds||align="right"|1872||
|-
|deforest||align="right"|1874||
|-
|spaghetti||align="right"|1874||
|-
|intercollegiate||align="right"|1874||
|-
|Helicon||align="right"|1875||
|-
|dermatitis||align="right"|1876||
|-
|semiprivate||align="right"|1876||
|-
|toniest||align="right"|1877||
|-
|supplies||align="right"|1878||
|-
|quirking||align="right"|1878||
|-
|wagged||align="right"|1879||
|-
|onionskin||align="right"|1879||
|-
|bacillus||align="right"|1879||
|-
|clobber||align="right"|1879||
|-
|steamrollered||align="right"|1879||
|-
|alumna||align="right"|1879||
|-
|locoweed||align="right"|1879||
|-
|toeholds||align="right"|1880||
|-
|paternalism||align="right"|1881||
|-
|adrenals||align="right"|1882||
|-
|syndicating||align="right"|1882||
|-
|winery||align="right"|1882||
|-
|interface||align="right"|1882||
|-
|infantryman||align="right"|1883||
|-
|worldlier||align="right"|1883||
|-
|shyest||align="right"|1884||
|-
|showdowns||align="right"|1884||
|-
|oilfield||align="right"|1884||
|-
|words||align="right"|1884||
|-
|fixating||align="right"|1885||
|-
|micron||align="right"|1885||
|-
|stagehand||align="right"|1885||
|-
|contraceptives||align="right"|1886||
|-
|sensitization||align="right"|1887||
|-
|parachutists||align="right"|1888||
|-
|sandblaster||align="right"|1888||
|-
|erogenous||align="right"|1889||
|-
|lactating||align="right"|1889||
|-
|psychopathics||align="right"|1890||
|-
|reactor||align="right"|1890||
|-
|unsnaps||align="right"|1892||
|-
|decolletes||align="right"|1894||
|-
|inbound||align="right"|1894||
|-
|marihuana||align="right"|1894||
|-
|encapsulated||align="right"|1894||
|-
|erythrocytes||align="right"|1894||
|-
|sequinned||align="right"|1894||
|-
|defrosted||align="right"|1895||
|-
|sacks||align="right"|1895||
|-
|phonemes||align="right"|1896||
|-
|mescaline||align="right"|1896||
|-
|ions||align="right"|1896||
|-
|midyear||align="right"|1896||
|-
|redwoods||align="right"|1897||
|-
|happenstances||align="right"|1897||
|-
|sandhog||align="right"|1897||
|-
|eggs||align="right"|1898||
|-
|taxicab||align="right"|1899||
|-
|concoction||align="right"|1675||
|}
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:49, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

: I identified several dozen words as possibly conservative. But the problem here is that a general sample does not catch enough real conservative words. Still, you might assess the centuries of my selections (I didn't look at any dates before making these selections) and we can go from there.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:36, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

::Thank you for your work! I now added the dates of the words, as found automatically at the Merriam-Webster. Here a first table:
{|class="wikitable"
!
!16s
!17s
!18s
!Σ
|-
!conservative words
|15||9||17||41
|-
!all words
|176||114||210||500
|-
!percentage of conservative words
|8.52%||7.89%||8.1%||8.2%
|}

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 11:29, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

::: That's a fascinating analysis, but its meaning is simply this: roughly 8% of all new words are conservative in nature. That is greater than the number of words I would have identified as liberal in nature.

::: But very few of these words qualified for our list, which expressly consists of the "''best''" new conservative words. Those words are being generated at a geometric rate.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:55, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

== Destruction of words ==

Andy, your model takes into account only the ''creation'' of new words. But in any living language, words fall out of use, too.

Imagine a country where a constant number of ''conservative words'' is created each year, but where these words have a half-time of 100 years, that is, e.g, only half of the words used in 1600 were still in use in 1700.

Such a country would have the same distribution of conservative words as [[Conservapedia's Law]] implies - but the overall number of conservative words becomes constant after a while...

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 10:02, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

: The conservative words are remarkably durable and long-lasting, while the liberal terms (like "population control") fall out of favor quite quickly.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:17, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

== PERFECTION: 20-40-80-160 BY CENTURY ==

For my statistical analysis, I recounted the words in the table: in fact, the
numbers in the small table of the words per century doesn't match the list of
the conservative words:

{|class="wikitable"
!century
!17th
!18th
!19th
!20th
!21st
|-
!claimed
|20||40||80||160||13
|-
!recount
|20||40||81||150||14
|}

An examination of the page's history showed that on Oct 31, 2009 this error was
introduced (with ''Segway'') - and preserved ever since.

{|class="wikitable"
!century
!17th
!18th
!19th
!20th
!21st
|-
!pre Segway
|14||28||56||112||6
|-
!post Segway
|15||28||56||124||6
|-
!my count
|15||29||57||114||6
|}

How does this confirm that ''selection bias'' is the driving force behind the [[Conservapedia's law]]? Well (ignoring the 21st century for a while), if this law holds then ~53% of the words you find should be from the 20th century, ~47% from the three earlier centuries.

But in the time from Oct 31, 2009 until Apr , 2010 when you claimed ''17-34-70-141 by century - spectacular, near-perfect geometric growth continues'', you found only 17 words from the last century, and 22 older words, that is, instead of 53% / 47% the odds of 44% / 56% !

After reaching this mile stone, your ratio rebounded...

So, you always reached your goal, though this was an arbitrary one, set by a typo. This implies that you are actively targeting a ratio, and that this ratio is independent of a actual distribution of the conservative words.

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 11:16, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

: Typos and counting errors are, of course, inevitable; your own comment above has an error in its last seven words. Errors can be found in the greatest of works, such as [[Bernard Riemann]]'s famous mathematical lecture. None of this undermines the value of Riemann's work ... or ours. The best new conservative words do double by century, and it would be nearly impossible to identify such a large number closely fitting that pattern unless the underlying pattern existed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:06, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

You are right: It´s not about typos - it's about the phenomenon I'll explain in the following section
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 10:46, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

== Too Good to be True ==

Imagine the hypothesis: There are as many male writers as there are female
ones.

To proof this hypothesis, round for round, a player '''A''' names a male author,
then a player '''B''' a female one. The round one player runs out of names - and
the other doesn't- the hypothesis is falsified. If both stop in the same round,
the hypothesis is true.

But what can be said about the validity of the hypothesis before this last
round? There are thousands and thousands of authors, what do we know when we
reach round 300?

Nothing. At least nothing about the ratio of female and male authors! In fact,
imagine the game with player '''A''' naming ''two'' male authors for each of
player '''B''''s female writer. After 300 rounds, this game is far from being
finished, but we can't conclude anything!

Unless this game is played to its end, it's just an exercise in futility.

Statistics try to find methods which allow to draw conclusions without exhausting the whole population1

So, what's another way to create data for validating or falsifying the
hypothesis? Let's think of player '''S''' who says that he will gather authors
at random - and that this list will beautifully exemplify the hypothesis.

And so it does: he gives a couple of hundred names and - lo and behold - exactly
half of them are males! He even goes a step further and says that each two
consecutive name would mirror the hypothesis.

When would you start to suspect that he is not an honest player? The probability
that a pair of authors consists from a man and a woman is 1/2. And in a random
list of names, you'll find many such pairs. But if '''S''' announces: the next
pair is gender-mixed, the one thereafter, too, and the next one, again - that's
like predicting three ''heads'' when tossing a coin three times. If he does it
ten times, you would be a fool not to think that something fishy is happening,
i.e., that the names are not taken from a random list of authors, but in fact
are chosen deliberately. His data is just ''too good to be true''!

Such a list has no more significance than the first couple of hundred names
generated by our players '''A''' and '''B'''.

Andy, I hope you see how this scenario applies to your method of generating
''best conservative new words''.

At least four times you announced the start of a new ''layer'', and each time,
you were able to complete it perfectly. Though the probability to find the
combination 1-2-4-8 for 15 words may be bigger than for each other combination,
it's at best 2.6508% . Doing this four times in a row yields odds of
1:2,000,000.

Again, your findings are just ''too good to be true'', therefore, they are not
believable, and don't support your claims made in [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law]].

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 10:46, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

: Disbelief of something because it is "too good to be true" is not a strong argument against it. Perhaps it is not precisely true as stated, but is a rough approximation, for example. Your specific arguments against the proposition above don't withstand scrutiny.

: Finding the best new conservative words is like drilling for oil. Of course it is not a random process. That would be silly. But the lack of randomness does not mean that no intelligent conclusions can be drawn. We can properly conclude that there is more oil in the Arabian Peninsula than in Pennsylvania, where oil was first discovered, despite the lack of randomness in drilling oil wells. Our conclusion would be based on the difference in output, and the implausibility that ''any'' reasonable selection technique would produce such a differential if there were not also an underlying difference.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:06, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

== A summary with graphs... ==

On June 9, 2009, Andrew Schlafly proclaimed his [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law]]: <blockquote>'''Conservapedia's Law''' ''is the observation that conservative insights increase over time at a geometric rate, as in 1-2-4-8-16-etc. 
''For example, there is a doubling in effective new conservative terms per century. </blockquote> This remarkable precise observation was bolstered over the time by a list of 300 ''conservative words''
<blockquote>''Powerful, insightful new conservative terms have grown at a geometric rate, roughly doubling every century. For every insightful new conservative term originating in the 1600s, there are two new terms originating in the 1700s, four new terms in the 1800s, and eight new terms in the 1900s, for a pattern of "1-2-4-8". This implies a more conservative future and a correlation between conservatism and truth. The year 1612 is our starting point: the King James Version of the Bible was published in 1611, and William Shakespeare had written nearly all his plays. ''</blockquote>

{|
|The pic on the right shows the percentage of terms per century in which they were first mentioned.
|[[File:Bcw-001.png|thumb|Best Conservative New Words]]
|-
|The distribution of these ''conservative words'' is even more remarkable as it doesn't reflect the general trends of creating new words. To exemplify this, I took a sample of ≈ 42,000 words from the word-book of my ubuntu-distribution and checked their creation date with the Merriam-Webster (the gray areas of the two diagrams overlap)
|[[File:Bcw-002.png|thumb|distribution of 42,000 words]]
|-
|To convince Andy Schlafly's that the distribution of the words in his list is just an artifact generated by [[sample bias]], I at first showed that it doesn't hold for shorter periods of time than centuries. But Andy Schlafly told me that he didn't see ''any merit'' in my challenge: ''The entry observes that new terms are generated at higher rates during productive periods within decades, for example just after or during religious awakenings.''
|[[File:Bcw-003.png|thumb|Cons. Words per Decade]]
|-
|Interestingly, I couldn't observe any effect of the ''Great Religious Awakenings'', neither in the number of ''conservative words'' nor in the number of all words.
|[[Image:Bcw-004.png|thumb|All Words per Decade]]
|}
No methodology is given how the ''conservative words'' are detected and gathered. To put the whole thing on a sounder ground, I asked Andrew Schlafly to take an unbiased text: I gave him a list of 500 words, which were - according to the [[Merriam Webster]] - first mentioned between 1600 and 1999. Andrew Schlafly objected to this sample as newer words are not well represented in word-books. When I propelled a second sample, consisting of 500 words all originated between 1600 and 1899 (300 years should be enough to prove his law), he was willing to mark the words he things to be conservative.

I'm very grateful that Andrew Schlafly took part in my little experiment: Thank you!

{|
|The five hundred words were taken at random from the suitable subset of the 42,000 words which I had dated, and so the sample distribution matches the overall distribution
|[[File:Bcw-005.png|thumb|500 Words per Centuries]]
|-
|Andrew Schlafly identified 41 words (8.2%) as conservative. The distribution of these 41 words over the centuries does not show a geometric progression.
|[[Image:Bcw-006.png|thumb|Identified as Conservative]]
|-
|In fact, their distribution mirrors the distribution of the whole sample, as each century ≈ 8% of the words are identified as ''conservative''
|[[File:Bcw-007.png|thumb|Percentages]]
|-
|This linearly dependence can be found for shorter periods of time (here for steps of 20 years) - and is found to be statistically significant.
|[[File:Bcw-008.png|thumb|Periods of 20 years]]
|-
|A striking contrast to this is the absence of any connection between Andrew Schlafly's list of over 300 conservative words, and a general distribution of the creation of words.
|[[File:Bcw-009.png|thumb|Periods of 20 years]]
|-
|However, if one maps the percentage of words in - e.g. - a 20 years' period in the corresponding century (24% of all 20th-century word are from the 1900s, 18% from the 1920s, 26% from the 1940s, and so forth...), one finds again a positive correlation.
|[[File:Bcw-010.png|thumb|percentages over 20 years]]
|}

Andrew Schlafly explains the discrepancies as follows:<blockquote>That's a
fascinating analysis, but its meaning is simply this: roughly 8% of all new
words are conservative in nature. That is greater than the number of words I
would have identified as liberal in nature. But very few of these words
qualified for our list, which expressly consists of the "best" new conservative
words. Those words are being generated at a geometric rate.--Andy Schlafly
11:55, 28 July 2010 (EDT) </blockquote>

I've to take exception to this: Andrew Schlafly has shown that he is able to
generate candidates for his list for any time period as it is needed to fit his
prediction. He could as easily make a list following a 1-3-9-27 (or 2-3-5-7-11)
pattern.

Even a claim like: ''the number of Best New Conservative Words'' is not corroborated in any way by the list of the [[Essay:Best New Conservative Words]], and the geometric progressions seems to be just the approximation of a phantasy.

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 13:23, 3 August 2010 (EDT)

:Ron, your quantity of commentary is impressive and your graphs (the ones that show up) are informative. But quantity is no substitute or quality. You never addressed my point above about how finding the ''best'' conservative words is like drilling for oil. Even if the same percentage of drills in Pennsylvania struck oil as in the Arabian Peninsula, that would not mean that both regions are equal for drilling for oil. Much better wells can be found in the Arabian Peninsula, and that's what this analysis is all about. Those good Arabian wells cannot be found in Pennsylvania, even though oil was first discovered there.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:04, 3 August 2010 (EDT)

::*''Ron, your quantity of commentary is impressive and your graphs (the ones that show up) are informative.'' Thanks. BTW, all the graphs are in Conservapedia's database - you can get directly to the missing two [http://conservapedia.com/images/d/d1/Bcw-003.png bcw-003.png] and [http://conservapedia.com/images/a/a0/Bcw-004.png bcw-004.png]. It seems that the thumbs and the previews weren't produced correctly - maybe a glitch in your software to which you want attend?
::*''But quantity is no substitute or quality.'' You mad a couple of quantifiable claims (''1-2-4-8 pattern''), so a quantitative analysis is what you get. You may rest assured that the quality of my information is good, too, and the math behind the analysis is sound: It's just basic statistics done with R.
::*''You never addressed my point above about how finding the best conservative words is like drilling for oil. '' As far as metaphors go, this isn't such a bad one: Imagine four oil fields. If you put one, two, four and eight wells on them, you get oil out of them according to your geometric progression. This works as long as there is enough oils in the fields, but you can say something about the amount of oil in the fields at first when they start getting dry. The English language is very rich, it seems that 8% of its words are conservative, so there should be an abundance even of ''best conservative words''. Until you have sucked a century dry, you cannot say anything about the distribution of the ''best conservative words''.

::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 08:14, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

One way of marrying the two ideas above (that there is no increase of conservative terms over time and that there is an increase in the "best" conservative terms over time) is simply to suggest that conservative terms are getting better in quality and not quantity, which is the point that Mr. Schlafly makes, I believe. An explanation that might want to be considered is that after a new term is coined, it may slowly lose its relevence over time. I would suggest that if you look at the vocabulary from the 17th century, many words have lost their relevence greatly. This presumably applies to conservative terms as well. So, a partial explanation for conservative terms increasing in "quality" over time may be the decrease in time-lag and thus an increase in relevence.--[[User:GrahamB|GrahamB]] 12:15, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

== Decrypt ==

Can I challenge 'decrypt' as a conservative word? Take the greatest decryption exercise in history, the breaking of the German Enigma code in World War 2 by British and Polish cryptographers. Alan Turing, who made the crucial breakthrough, was homosexual. Several others involved may have been communist sympathisers. The great majority were recruited from either the civil service (= Big Government) or universities (= Professor Values) and returned to those professions when WW2 was over. Bottom line: not a very conservative bunch. (Check [http://www.bletchleypark.org.uk the Bletchley Park website].) [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 18:05, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

: Beware of [[liberal]] revisionism, where historians try to give credit to liberals for achievements no matter how unjustified. It was Polish mathematicians who decrypted the enigma, not an Englishman. The British are notoriously weak in mathematics.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:11, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

:: Andy, you don't seem to know so much about the decoding of Enigma. I gave you the reference to the Bletchley Park website so you can read about it there. The main contributions from the Poles were (1) stealing a German Enigma machine, (2) working out how Enigma encoded messages, (3) getting the Enigma machine to the Brits and (4) proposing a method for automated decoding of ciphers (the "Bombe"). The bombes that were eventually built were constructed by British engineers and used some principles but not the details of the Polish mathematicians' idea. Pretty much everything else was done by the British, including the first decipherment of Enigma, the second decipherment when the German Navy introduced a more sophisticated code, and the building of Colussus, the world's first programmable electronic computer, which played an essential role in decoding the later, more complex Enigma codes used by the U-boat fleet. Turing's role was crucial (that ain't liberal revisionism - go on, read about it). Some Poles who'd escaped to England did indeed work with the British but it just ain't true that they decoded Enigma.
:: As for "the British are notoriously weak in math": you're having a laugh, as my British colleagues would say. [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 19:47, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

::: Benjy, British liberals famously support and credit each other, often undeservedly so. If you find a great British mathematician who ranks with the best in the world, please do tell us who he is!

::: As to decoding the Enigma, perhaps the Brits did some machinery to help, but the mathematicians who provided the brainpower were Poles.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:14, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

:::: Sir Isaac Newton was a British liberal (he was a non-standard Christian that wrote extensively on the occult) who was the first to scientifically describe gravity and his 1687 publication ''Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica'' is considered the seminal work in classical mechanics. The top physicists in the world consider Newton one of the two greatest physicists in history, and his name is still used in science today, for example, "a non-Newtonian fluid". He may also have been homosexual, conisdering he was largely sexless in an age where homosexuality could get you burned at the stake. [[User:JohnQP|JohnQP]] 21:44, 5 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::Brilliant logic. 17th century tabloids tell us little of the women in Newton's life, therefore, there must not have been any. As for his writings on the occult, perhaps your referring to his beliefs that some tales in Ovid's Metamorpheses were inspired by physical fact? If I recall, he was proved right in this regard, when he demonstrated that the chemicals which corresponding to classical elements ascribed to certain mythological figures actually, in one case, produced a cracking purple "web-like" effect when combined - just as in Ovid's story. I'd hardly call this un-Christian, especially since he also used translating the Bible as inspiration for much of his work. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]][[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]] 21:50, 5 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::I must agree with you, JacobB. This is nothing other than rank liberal revisionism of the highest order. Slandering the good name of such a noble Christian is just plainly offensive. --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 21:54, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

''" If you find a great British mathematician who ranks with the best in the world, please do tell us who he is!"'' - Here is a small list of some whom I would consider to rank with the world's best (in no particular order):
* Sir Isaac Newton
* Charles Babbage
* Alan Turing
* G.H. Hardy
* Bertrand Russell
* Roger Penrose
* Andrew Wiles
* Arthur Cayley
* William Rowan Hamilton
* George Boole
* Augustus De Morgan
Whilst I agree that Polish mathematicians played an important role in cracking the Enigma code, but to jump from that to saying that not only are there no great British mathematicians, but that also Brits are 'notoriously weak' at maths - is clearly unfair and incorrect. [[User:FionaN|FionaN]] 07:40, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

: While I am respectful of the contributions of those on your list, as a group they are a far cry from the greatest mathematicians and many would not be considered "British". Hamilton was Irish, for example, and Newton was pre-modern and pre-Britain. Wiles did his work in the U.S. Russell's work was deflated by Godel, and others on the list don't even come close to being great mathematicians.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:21, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

:: Fiona seems to miss the varying degrees of "mathematician", "great mathematician", and "one of the greatest mathematicians" as if they're all the same thing. We saw the same thing when another contributor was unable to grasp the difference between "conservative words" and "best conservative words". It's as if liberals can see everything in the world only in black and white terms, as if everything falls perfectly into one of two categories, e.g. "mathematician" and "not-mathematician". I think this is another example of [[Liberal Inability To Abstract]]. [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 14:42, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

Andy, you stated: "It was Polish mathematicians who decrypted the enigma, not an Englishman" and "The British are notoriously weak in mathematics". Both these statements are not only untrue but ridiculous. I've tried to contribute to this encyclopedia but I'm not going to waste my time messing around if you fill it up with your own uninformed prejudices, refuse to do some easy reading to check your facts, and get absurdly defensive when your statements are corrected by people who are more knowledgeable on the subject in question. ''Laziness is not a conservative character trait, least of all intellectual laziness.'' Please tell me if you're going to check your facts before shooting your mouth off in future, in which case I'd be pleased to continue contributing to CP. [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 15:40, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

: Benjy, please rant somewhere else instead. We tell the truth here, whether [[Anglophile]]s accept it or not. The relative weakness of [[Britain]] in mathematics is an objective fact.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:44, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::Have you any proof for your assertion? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 16:37, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::(EC) Hi Andy. Are you talking about mathematical ability in the general UK population, or about the number of major contributions to the field by British mathematicians? Thanks, --[[User:JoanZ|JoanZ]] 16:48, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

:::(EC) Look at any list of the greatest mathematicians of the past 200 and count how many were from Britain. Or list the greatest modern mathematical achievements and count how many came out of Britain. I'm sorry liberals don't teach this, and that's why there is a need for Conservapedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:50, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::::According to [http://fabpedigree.com/james/mathmen.htm this blog], 9 of 99 were British - and that's an all time, Ancient Greece to present list. Now you; would you care to support your position with sources? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:05, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::And ''your source'' comes from a ''blog?'' How about you, SamI, come up with non-blog, official sources yourself to support ''your'' position. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:16, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::Rather a blog than my own imagination. Would Andy care to provide his sources? The burden of proof, and all that. [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:21, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::(EC)[http://www.sci.hkbu.edu.hk/scilab/math/math.html This list gives 3 British and 1 Irish out of 14.] And why do I keep having to fill out captcha boxes? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:25, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::Andy said "Look at '''any''' list" (my emphasis). This is a list already on the Internet so SamI is just following Andy's advice. Please note that there are '''no''' people on that list who were born in the U.S.A. [[User:GeoffA|GeoffA]] 17:23, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::Guess what...you, SamI, just accused Andy of using his own imagination, and since you, GeoffA, is supportive of Sam's statement, both of you are going to get official sources to support your side, otherwise I'm going to assume you are using your own imaginations just to troll here. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:31, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::::I would say that the second source I posted above is fairly official. And why do we need to support our side, but Andy doesn't have to support his beyond saying 'oh, it's an objective fact'? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:39, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::How about the [[Fields Medal]] as a rough proxy? I count six awarded to UK mathematicians out of a total of 48 (12.5%), compared to thirteen awarded to Americans (~27%). Not bad for a small island. --[[User:JoanZ|JoanZ]] 17:27, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::::: Well there you go "Karajou". Since the USA has a population ~5 times larger than the UK, it looks like the UK is doing pretty well. And don't you think Andy can talk for himself without you leaping to his side? What are '''your''' sources to support his statement? [[User:GeoffA|GeoffA]] 17:36, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::There are better ways to prove us wrong then by coming here and making demands; one of those ways is to provide a reasonable explanation which supports your position, backed up by valid sources, and being polite about the whole thing. See ya in a couple hours. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:44, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

(outdent) Well I used the two "ours" you gave me to find some sources.

How about this [http://www.virtualimage.co.uk/html/great_mathematicians.html commercial source]? Of the 20 mathematiciams, John Napier, Ada Lovelace, Lewis Carroll, Alan Turing and William Oughtred are British. That's 25%. No Americans.

Or how about [http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2010/apr/11/the-10-best-mathematicians this] article listing a top 10? 1 Brit - no Americans.

The Scientific Computing Laboratory at Hong Kong Baptist University [http://www.sci.hkbu.edu.hk/scilab/math/math.html lists] four Brits out of 14. Yes - Christains disagree with you too.

Another blog (I know you don't like them, but surely the "Best of the Public" is always right? Your boss thinks so) [http://kaushal42.blogspot.com/2008/01/twenty-five-greatest-mathematicians-of.html here] has two Brits out of 25. No Americans.

Centre College [http://web.centre.edu/mat/century.html lists] 24 for last century alone. Four Brits and Five Yanks. That's still not bad for such a poor, small, atheistic island.

Lastly, in the magazine Mathematics Teacher (I.7. Vol.55, 1962), W.C. Eells [http://afrodita.rcub.bg.ac.rs/~flora/100.html published] a list of the 100 greatest mathematicians of all time. I'm not going to go through all 100, but Newton, Napier, Wallis, Hamilton, Barrow, Taylor, Briggs, Babbage, Smith, H.J.S., Cotes, Boole, Halley and Lord Kelvin were all Brits. That's 13/100.

So. There are your sources. I note that SamI can't respond because TK blocked him/her. Since I fully expect the same fate to befall me after this post for having proved you wrong, I'll say goodbye now. I suppose it's unrealistic to expect you or Andy to provide sources to back up ''your'' point of view. [[User:GeoffA|GeoffA]] 19:43, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:Granted, GeoffA, I would agree with your point that we should provide sources to back up our point of view. But we're not going to do it for someone on demand. And there lies the end of the lesson. Hope you learned something about tact. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 21:05, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

*Is there something in the water over there in the U.K., or is it your atheism? Perhaps its the generally gloomy economic picture and remnants of the class system that make you as you are! Godspeed to all of you. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 17:38, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

Brits, we're talking about '''''mathematicians''''' in this thread. Do you know what a mathematician is? That's not a physicist (Penrose), a computer geek (Lovelace, Babbage, Turing), or a political hack (Russell). One more tip: the Irish (Hamilton) do not consider themselves to be British.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:25, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

*''Newton was pre-modern and pre-Britain'': The [[Oxford calculators]] were pre-modern, but English. [[John Napier]] or [[Richard Recorde]] where Scottish or Welsh - though they weren't English, they were inhabitants of the British Isles, and therefore British in the same sense as most Haitians are Hispaniolians as well. Both are modern mathematicians - in the usual sense of the word ''"modern"'' when talking about periods of history. You may describe them as ''early modern''. Sir Isaac Newton - who lived even later - was e a modern mathematician, too. And as a subject of Queen Anne of Great Britain, he was most certainly British.
*''Do you know what a mathematician is? '' A mathematician is someone who contributes to the field of mathematics. Mathematicians are not squeamish: you could be covered with green fur and be a baker - if you solve an open Hilbert problem, they will you love you, and count you as a mathematician. Penrose, Lovelace, Babbage, Turing and Russell were great mathematicians, even if they were part-time physicists, geeks or hacks. {{unsigned|RonLar}}

:: Additionally, the overlap between mathematics and physics is huge - especially applied mathematics. Sophie Germain, a ''woman'' mathematician who appears on several of those lists, contributed a huge amount of work to the subject of elastics, and her work was used extensively, for instance in the construction of the Eiffel Tower. She is universally considered to be a mathematician, but you would apparently describe her as a physicist or even an architect. Russell was deeply involved in the Hilbert Program, which though ultimately unsuccessful provided modern mathematics with a solid framework. His work ''Principia Mathematica'' is one of the most important works on the subject.

:: I cannot understand why you have such a closed mind on this subject. You have plenty of evidence that contradicts your opinion, so it's now only fair that you present evidence to support your hypothesis or at least consider revising it.

:: Please note, that I am not claiming that Britain is the pre-eminent country for producing mathematicians. Germany would probably win that prize across modern history, and if you take the last 50 years or so, it's probably the U.S.A. (although I have no hard evidence for that statement). I merely take issue with your statement that "The British are notoriously weak in mathematics". [[User:GeoffA|GeoffA]] 08:43, 7 August 2010 (EDT)

== General reply to Brits, if any, who commented above ==

The [[Brits]] who protest so stridently illustrate to me the problem of [[Anglophilia]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:22, 7 August 2010 (EDT)

:"curiouser and curiouser" - for me, it looks as the [[Anglophobe]]s are justignoring the evidence:

:{|class="wikitable"
!colspan="3"|Field Medalists by Country
|-
!country
!#
!medalist
|-
!USA
|align="right"|13 ||Jesse Douglas, John Milnor, Paul Joseph Cohen, Stephen Smale, John G. Thompson, Charles Fefferman, Daniel Quillen, William Thurston, Shing-Tung Yau, Michael Freedman, Edward Witten, Curtis T. McMullen, David Mumford
|-
!France
|align="right"|9||Laurent Schwartz, Jean-Pierre Serre, René Thom, Alexander Grothendieck, Alain Connes, Pierre-Louis Lions, Jean-Christophe Yoccoz, Laurent Lafforgue, Wendelin Werner
|-
!Soviet Union/Russia
|align="right"|8||Sergei Novikov, Grigory Margulis, Vladimir Drinfel'd, Efim Zelmanov, Maxim Kontsevich, Vladimir Voevodsky, Andrei Okounkov, (Grigori Perelman)
|-
!UK
|align="right"|6||Klaus Roth, Michael Atiyah, Alan Baker, Simon Donaldson, Richard Borcherds, Timothy Gowers
|-
!Japan
|align="right"|3||Kunihiko Kodaira, Heisuke Hironaka, Shigefumi Mori
|-
!Belgium
|align="right"|2||Pierre Deligne, Jean Bourgain
|-
!Finland
|align="right"|1||Lars Ahlfors
|-
!Norway
|align="right"|1||Atle Selberg
|-
!Sweden
|align="right"|1||Lars Hörmander
|-
!Italy
|align="right"|1||Enrico Bombieri
|-
!Germany
|align="right"|1||Gerd Faltings
|-
!New Zealand
|align="right"|1||Vaughan F. R. Jones
|-
!Australia
|align="right"|1||Terence Tao
|}

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 15:04, 9 August 2010 (EDT)

:Klaus Roth was Prussian. Michael Atiyah is Sudanese/Egyptian. Simon Donaldson does his work in ''four-dimensions'' when this world obviously only has ''three''. I imagine if I made up the math as I went, I could get a Fields medal as well? And Richard Borcherds is from South Africa.
:So spectacularly, you provide ''maybe'' two candidates for British mathematicians. Hardly impressive, considering ''Finland'' managed to get one. And who cares about this "Field's Medal" anyways? It's just some award experts give to each other to make each other feel better, and exclude the best of the public. --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 20:07, 9 August 2010 (EDT)
::For the record, "Cathy," the cobordism work of Donaldson was not only essential to the classification theorems which have revolutionized modern topology, but also have important applications in quantum mechanics and other fields that deal with "this world." For somebody who apparently has such extensive knowledge in the history of 20th century mathematics, you are certainly lacking in understanding if you believe Donaldson "made up the math as he went." As for the Fields medal (no apostrophe) being something that the best of the public are excluded from, you should be aware that best of the public exemplar Gregori Perelman was OFFERED a Fields medal and turned it down.
::Before you continue your pattern of jumping into talk page arguments with on-the-spot research, I suggest you make significant and substantive edits to our mainspace articles.[[User:JacobB|JacobB]][[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]] 20:38, 9 August 2010 (EDT)

Liberal myths

2010-08-15T21:45:33Z

ChrisGT90: /* Liberal myths are heavily promoted falsehoods motivated by a destructive belief system */

== Liberal myths are heavily promoted falsehoods motivated by a destructive belief system ==

Liberal beliefs:<ref>http://www.twilightslastgleaming.com/myths.htm</ref> They include:

*The claim that human beings are beginning to overpopulate. (This myth is used as an attempt to justify abortion and anthropogenic global warming)
*The claim that people today are more knowledgeable than in prior centuries.
*The claim that the [[George W. Bush|Bush]] tax cuts substantially reduced 2006 revenues and expanded the [[budget]] deficit.
*The claim that the Bush tax cuts have not helped the economy.
*Anthropogenic [[Global Warming]]. <ref>[http://www.nowpublic.com/some-exasperating-liberal-myths Some Exasperating Liberal Myths] NowPublic.com, August 27, 2007</ref>
*The claim that a [[fetus]] is not a living person.
*The claim the [[embryonic stem cell]]s will provide many cures. Unlike adult stem cells, embryonic cells have provided no known cures.
*The claim that [[gun control]] reduces crime.
*The claim that [[abortion]] and [[breast cancer]] are unrelated.
*The claim that [[abortion]] and mental depression are unrelated.
*The claim that [[gambling]] financially benefits state school systems <REF>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/17/cbsnews_investigates/main3269456.shtml Is The Lottery Shortchanging Schools?] CBS News, September 17, 2007</ref>
*The claim to support the rights of women, never mention the oppressed women in Muslim countries. <ref>[http://www.aclu.org/womensrights/index.html About the Women's Rights Project] ACLU</ref>
*The claim that the [[media]] is not biased toward the liberal agenda.
*The claim that enabling [[oil]] drilling will not reduce long-term [[energy]] prices. <ref>[http://rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/07/nancy_pelosis_energy_policy.php?comments=show Nancy Pelosi's Energy Policy] Rightwingnews.com, July 8, 2008</ref>
*The claim that enabling oil drilling will not provide [[energy]] security.<ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=33767 Oil Money May Buy Drilling Vote, Liberal Says] CNSNews.com, August 7, 2008</ref>
*The claim that same-sex couple adoptions can replace the [[love]] from a mother and a father. <ref>[http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/families/a/adoption_2.htm Lesbian and Gay Adoption Rights] About.com</ref>
*The claim that an individuals [[sexual]] preference needs to be a protected civil right. <ref>[http://www.civilrights.org/research_center/civilrights101/sexualorientation.html GAYS AND LESBIANS] Civilrights.com</ref>
*That there is a [[vast right-wing conspiracy]] <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,359741,00.html THE VAST LEFT-WING CONSPIRACY] Fox News, May 29, 2008</ref>
*The claim that opposing the [[homosexual agenda]] is [[bigotry]]. <ref>[http://www.boycottmcdonalds.com/detail.aspx?id=102 Boycott McDonald's!] American Family Association</ref>
*The claim that the US acted unilaterally in Iraq (The USA and Britain led a 30-nation coalition in Iraq)<ref>[http://www.heritage.org/Research/Europe/wm558.cfm The Myth of U.S. Isolation] The Heritage Foundation, September 7, 2004 </ref>
*The claim that [[President Bush]] stole the 2000 elections. <ref>[http://archive.democrats.com/display.cfm?id=239 Floridagate] Democrats.com</ref>
*The claim that [[President Bush]] lied about WMD in [[Iraq]] to grab [[oil]].
*The claim that [[Saddam Hussein]] was not seeking to buy yellowcake Uranium. <ref>[http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/14/tenet-niger/ Tenet Agrees To Cooperate With Congressional Investigation Into Niger Fraud] ThinkProgress, May 14, 2007</ref>
*The claim that the [[9/11]] terrorists attacks were an inside job by the [[USA]].
*The claim that Foreign Intelligence & Surveillance Act (FISA) is for spying on Americans. <ref>[http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/35928prs20080709.html Senate Passes Unconstitutional Spying Bill] ACLU, July 9, 2008</ref>
*The claim that [[big government]] will benefit its' citizens. <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/politics/candidates_public_service/2008/09/11/130009.html McCain, Obama Discuss Views on Public Service] Ap, September 11, 2008</ref>
*The claim that [[military]] recruits are poor and uneducated. <ref>[http://www.heritage.org/research/nationalsecurity/cda05-08.cfm Who Bears the Burden? Demographic Characteristics of U.S. Military Recruits] Heritage Foundation, November 7, 2005</ref> <ref>[http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_200612/ai_n17197505 Rangel Is Wrong About Recruits] Human Events, December 4,2006</ref> <ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/31/kerry.mccain/ Bush on Kerry remark: U.S. troops are 'plenty smart'] CNN, November 1, 2006</ref>
*The claim that [[government]] run [[healthcare]] is better than a capitalist healthcare system. <ref>[http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr009=j7lglh8nq9.app5b&page=NewsArticle&id=9238&news_iv_ctrl=1283 Free, universal health care must be a right!] VotePSL.org, may 30, 2008</ref>
*They claim that going on the offense against [[terrorists]] creates more terrorists. <ref>[http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/03/madeleine-albright-we-created-more.html Madeleine Albright: "We Created More Terrorists... Our Soldiers Are the Problem"] Gateway Pundit, March 27, 2008</ref>
*They claim that terrorism should be handled by [[law]] enforcement. <ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/29/AR2008072902041.html Strategy Against Al-Qaeda Faulted] Washington Post, July 30, 2008</ref> <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,406901,00.html Bush: War on Terror is Not Law Enforcement Matter] AP, August 20, 2008</ref>
*They claim that the USA should negotiate with rogue [[nations]] and terror groups.
*They claim that [[socialism]] is a better than [[capitalism]].
*They claim that there is a [[gene]] which causes people to be gay, despite the fact that the scientific community rejects this view
*They claim that [[humans]] and [[ape]]s have a common ancestor
*They claim that the [[death penalty]] does not deter [[crime]], despite the overwhelming evidence showing that the death penalty does deter crime
*They claim that [[atheists]] are just as moral as [[Christians]] who regularly go to a church, or, in some cases, claim atheists are morally superior.
*They claim that all [[religions]] teach the same thing.
*They claim that [[intelligent design]] is not a science and has no evidence.
*They claim that no [[climatologist]] or [[physicist]] rejects global warming, despite the fact that the founder of The Weather Channel rejects global warming, as do thousands of other scientists.
*They claim Hitler was a [[Catholic]].
*They claim opposition to [[Obama]] is racism.
*They claim the general welfare clause in the Constitution gives government the right to force you to buy government-run healthcare.
*They claim Jesus was the first [[socialist]].
*They claim [[affirmative action]] works.
*They claim the [[Old Testament]] is immoral.
*They claim that the [[Jews]] aren't the Jews of the Bible.
*They claim that [[feminism]] has no bias.
*They claim [[homosexuals]] do not try to convert [[heterosexuals]].
*They claim that [[gay marriage]] will not result in [[polygamy]] also being written into law.
*They claim that the [[Bible]] is fictional.
*They claim that [[Liberal Christianity]] is compatible with the teachings of [[Jesus Christ]].
*They claim that proper tire inflation can replace the need for additional oil drilling.
*That we should eat less red meat in order to combat [[climate change]].<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,418801,00.html</ref>
*They claim Jesus was a liberal, or that Jesus was left-wing<ref>[http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bernstein/works/1895/cromwell/09-communism.htm The 'Diggers' movement is held up as an example of good Christianity]</ref>.
*The claim that the [[Nation of Islam]] is unrelated to Islam the religion.
*The claim that portable school vouchers would destroy [[public schools]], yet send their own children to private schools.
*The claim that if you are [[pro-life]], you don't care about people after they're born. <ref>[http://twitter.com/movingleft Obnoxious supporter of Obama Twitter Account @MovingLeft (Warning:Vulgar)]</ref>
*The claim that more black people died in wars of [[America]] than in [[abortion]]. 1,786 blacks are killed '''daily''' by abortion, one of two [[pregnant]] women will be suckered into pro-choice genocide. [http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/1685410938.html]
*The claim that renaming [[War on Terror]] to Overseas Contingency Operation will reduce the threats facing America.
*The claim to cutback our country's missile defenses will some how make us more secure than we were.
*The claim that the nation will go bankrupt if we don't spend more tax dollars.
*We as a nation must switch to unproven technologies for the environments sake, such as wind or solar power. Yet, proven clean energy generated by nuclear power is not an option.
*The claim that you are not pro-life if you are [[pro-gun]].
*The claim that guns are responsible for deaths. (by that same logic, pencils are responsible for misspelled words.)
*The claim that 47 million Americans don't have health insurance. (Actual number is between 10 and 15 million) <ref>[[Essay:47 million Americans without health insurance lie‎]]</ref>
*They claim that homosexuality cannot be overcome by therapy and prayer
*Safe Sex, except between a married man and woman

==Patriotism==
The liberal belief that an individual can claim to support our military, just not the mission and still be considered a 'Patriot'. In fact, the exact opposite is the truth. A liberals patriotism, party-specific position, cannot support the troops if they are an a impediment to their political left-wing strategy. The main reason for this has to due with passionate, partisan hatred for George Bush as commander n chief, the [[President of the United States of America]]. Liberals claim to support the military, claim not to support the mission and refuse to support the Commander. The extremist left discounts the counter effect of troop morale. Understanding the true liberal mindset when it comes to supporting our U.S. troops, observe the often tried protest march. Though frustration boils over, actions lead from protest to outright sabotage or anarchism. <ref>[http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/01/anti-war-protest-at-gop-convention-turns-violent/ Anti-War Protest at GOP Convention Turns Violent] Fox News, September 1, 2008</ref> Liberal credibility fails and lack of concern for the support of America shows. The left-wing cares so much for our military they condone and actually prop up politicians that abuse troops with reckless accusations <ref>[http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0907/Federal_judge_order_Murtha_to_testify_in_Haditha_defamation_case.html Federal judge orders Murtha to testify in Haditha defamation case] Politico, September 28, 2007</ref>, negative media coverage and ego trips <ref>[http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blpic-kerrystuckiniraq.htm Political Humor] About.com</ref>. Liberal protesters look the other way as war memorials are vandalized. Liberals protest our severely injured soldiers at the Walter Reed Medical Center.<ref>[http://www.crosswalk.com/1347570/ Anti-War Protests Target Wounded at Army Hospital] Crosswalk.com</ref> Liberal protesters harass, damage or block military recruitment centers from operating business as-usual. <ref>[http://mfvov.com/blog/?p=505 Recruiting Center Attacks Coast to Coast] Military Families Voice of Victory, March 19, 2008</ref> This leftwing position, the myth is successful in feeding media driven discontent and mediocrity shame. If the news is bad, a liberal is spoon fed. If the news is good, the spoon fed liberal is oblivious. e.g. "a complete suspension of disbelief".

Patriotism, to your brother, who volunteers and risks the ultimate sacrifice out of love, will never be diminished. True patriots will always be in our gratitude and held in the highest light.

==America Perceived==
The myth liberals give says we need to restore America's image in the world. Again, this mostly has to do with liberals' negative view of [[President Bush]]. Liberals want the two linked even though the myth is false. They blame Bush and Iraq for the bad USA image but the truth is that the credibility of the American left is a worse image than America's image abroad. The main need for liberals to propagate this myth is the fact that [[socialist]] governments of Europe oppose the policy of [[Iraq]]. This further fuels liberals' political agenda to remove [[Republicans]] from power. Liberals love Europeans and cite their false socialist utopia at every chance. European opposition automatically reinforces their belief that America's image is damaged. As of 2008, most of the [[European]] leaders that opposed Iraq are no longer in positions of power. The result, European [[conservatives]] were elected who publicly aligned themselves with America.

Those [[liberals]] that use the myth and regularly bash the USA are often called the "Blame America First" crowd. Though they never seem to mention that America gives more in donations, in total dollars, than any other country on Earth. <ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-06-25-charitable_N.htm Americans give record $295B to charity] USA Today, 6/25/2007</ref> A sure way to change America's image in the world is to show the world we respect life. The repeal of Roe Vs. Wade would be a start.

Reasons why [[America]] was hated prior to 2003 include wealth, women's rights, support for our democratic ally [[Israel]], democratic government, capitalist economy and exporting immorality.

==Bad Successful Companies==
In the attempt to point fingers and lay blame, the liberals produce the myth that profits made by successful companies are bad for America. Only a select group of companies are targeted for public shame. This is a false myth because successful corporations actually create jobs and [[tax]] revenue. Retirement funds and municipal bonds rely heavily on the profits from these companies. Also, the reason these companies flourish is because the capitalist system rewards their hard work. The liberals will try to create sympathy, that they care for the average American, they are the ones going after wrongdoers to make it right.

[[Liberals]] have demonized such companies as RJ Reynolds, Walmart, Halliburton and Blackwater. Their latest target is Exxon Mobil for their enormous profits and futures market oil speculators. Most of their accusations are absurd. Liberals in [[Congress]] don't blink an eye when it comes time to spend all that tax revenue generated. Liberals in Congress have been called on their [[hypocrisy]] for owning stocks in those companies. Which in turn, they divest their portfolios like nothing was ever wrong. For years, for decades, these companies have lobbied members of Congress, they have worked together for their common goals. In return, hefty [[campaign]] donations are their reward. Then for opportune reasons, liberals will publicly ridicule and verbally attack these bad, greedy capitalists. Corporate heads are brought before congress for a sideshow grilling to explain their actions. <ref>[http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/01/MNU7VU217.DTL Congress asks Big Oil to justify big profits] The SF Chronicle, April 2, 2008</ref> The Windfall Tax is just another example of the sham created by this liberal myth. Those companies make enough money, they should now be forced to give some back. They are threatened with nationalization <ref>[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=65111 Congresswoman threatens to nationalize oil industry] Worldnetdaily.com, May 23, 2008</ref>
and further government regulation, a socialist scheme. As the price of gas fell, Congress just pretended like nothing ever happened, Big Oil off the hook.

==The Economy From The Previous 8 Years==
In an attempt to spread Bush hatred without mentioning his name, it is common for liberals to lie and say ''"we're in this economic mess because of the policies over the previous eight years."'' This is a myth, perpetuated by the corrupt in order to link bad economics with [[Conservatism]] and Bush policy. These liberals are the very same individuals that would not recognize George W. Bush's economic successes when the economy was creating jobs. Bush, [[McCain]], [[Alan Greenspan]] are all on record as trying to fix the corrupt lending policies and government mismanagement for the past eight years. <ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&NR=1 Financial Meltdown Video]YouTube</ref> All the while Democrats were lining their pockets with [[Fannie Mae]] and [[Freddie Mac]] donations. Democrats are overwhelmingly responsible if they should point fingers. Democrats [[Barney Frank]], [[Chris Dodd]], [[John Kerry]], [[Charles Schumer]] and even [[Barack Obama]] are as much, if not directly, indirectly responsible for the failed economics of this country over the past eight-years. The same people who got us into this mess are now responsible for getting us out of financial meltdown. Blame can go all around on this one, both Republicans and Democrats. This was the result of many bad decisions over a long period of time. Then out of nowhere, financial calamity that nobody saw coming, except congressmen and women who were privy to bank collapses. They made good money while the rest of America suffered. <ref>[http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2009/06/members_of_us_house_financial.html Members of U.S. House Financial Services Committee snapped up or dumped bank stocks as bottom fell out of market Cleveland.com June 25, 2009]</ref>

{{cquote|The truth of the matter; Bush-era 4.5% unemployment, Obama-era will it go higher than 10%?}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}
{{Liberalism}}

[[Category:Deceit]]
[[Category:liberals]]

History of Iran

2010-08-15T21:44:07Z

ChrisGT90:

The '''History of Iran''', historically known to the West as [[Persia]], stretched back to 600 BC. For recent events see [[Iran]].

Perdia was once a major empire in its own right, has been overrun frequently and has had its territory altered throughout the centuries. Invaded by Arabs, Seljuk Turks, Mongols, and others--and often caught up in the affairs of larger powers--Iran has always reasserted its national identity and has developed as a distinct political and cultural entity.
==Ancient==
see [[Persian Empire]]

The sixth millennium B.C. saw a fairly sophisticated agricultural society and proto-urban population centers. Many dynasties have ruled Iran, starting with the Achaemenid (559-330 B.C.) founded by [[Cyrus the Great]]. After the conquest of Persia by [[Alexander the Great]] and the Hellenistic period (300-250 B.C.) came the Parthian (250 B.C.-226 A.D.) and the Sassanian (226-651) dynasties.

==Muslim Conquest==
The seventh century Arab-Muslim conquest of Iran was followed with invasions by the Seljuk Turks and the Mongols. Iran underwent something of a revival under the Safavid dynasty (1502-1736), the most prominent figure of which was Shah Abbas, who expelled the Uzbeks and Ottomans from Persia. The conqueror Nadir Shah and his successors were followed by the Zand dynasty, founded by Karim Khan, and later the Qajar (1795-1925) and the Pahlavi dynasties (1925-1979).
==Modern Era==
Modern Iranian history began with a nationalist uprising against the Shah in 1905 and the establishment of a limited constitutional monarchy in 1906. The discovery of oil in 1908 would later become a key factor in Iranian history and development.

In 1921, Reza Khan, an Iranian officer of the Persian Cossack Brigade, seized control of the government. In 1925, having ousted the Qajar dynasty, he made himself Shah and established the Pahlavi dynasty, ruling as Reza Shah for almost 16 years.

Under Reza Shah's reign, Iran began to modernize and to secularize, and the central government reasserted its authority over the tribes and provinces. During World War Two the Allies feared the monarch close relations with Nazi Germany. In September 1941, following the occupation of western Iran by the Soviet Union and the United Kingdom, Reza Shah was forced to abdicate. His son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, became Shah and would rule until 1979.

====1941-48====
During [[World War II]] Iran was openly partial to the Axis cause. A joint Anglo-Soviet military action began on 25 August 1941 when 40,000 Soviet troops entered Iran from the north and headed for Tehran. On the same day about 19,000 British Commonwealth troops, mostly in Indian brigades, entered from various directions. There was slight resistance on the part of Iranian troops but no force Iran could not have withstood the power of the occupying armies of British Empire and the Soviet Union, and German assistance by air was now as far away as Crete. On 30 August 1941 identical notes were submitted by the invading powers to the Iranian Government which accepted their terms on 9 September. On 16 September the Shah abdicated in favor of his son, [[Mohammed Reza Pahlevi]], and left the country. The next day Tehran was jointly occupied by the British and Soviet troops without show of military force.

The terms imposed by Tri-Partite Treaty of alliance signed on 29 January 1942 disavowed any designs against the territorial integrity of Iran or independence. Iran agreed to refrain from any act contrary to British or Soviet interests. <ref>[http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/wwii/persian/chapter01.htm#b2 United States Army in World War II], The Middle East Theater The Persian Corridor and Aid to Russia, T. H. Vail Motter, Center of Military History United States Army Washington, D.C., 2000. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 52-60791. First Printed 1952-CMH Pub 8-1.</ref>

Soviet political "agitprops," graduates from the Lenin Institute in Moscow, were dispatched to exploit whatever resentment and hostility toward the "imperialist warmongers" of the West they might encounter or stir up. The [[Tudeh party]], founded early in 1942, at once began to lay the ground work for the Communist uprisings which followed World War II. The Tudeh party, guided by the Soviet officials who at the same time were supervising the movement of American [[lend-lease]] aid to the Soviet Union through Iran, began openly agitating against the Anglo-Saxon "exploiters." By 1944 Iran's mushrooming, Soviet-financed Tudeh press openly called the British and Americans "[[fascists]]," "[[reactionary|reactionaries]]," and "[[imperialism|imperialist]]." <ref>[http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/yaltabet.html ''The Yalta Betrayal''], Felix Wittmer, Claxton Printers, 1953, pg. 20, 54.</ref>

====1949-79====
In 1949 the Angelo-Persian Oil Company negotiated an agreement with the Iranian government under which it would pay the government 25 to 30 per cent of its net profits, The British government controlled 52 per cent of the stock of the company. Under pressure from the the Shia clergy and members of the Communist [[Tudeh party]], the Iranian government led by Prime Minister [[Mohammed Mossadegh]] did not ratify the agreement and on May 2, 1951, nationalized ownership of the oil industry. In October Britain shut down Abadan, the world's largest refinery, on the Persian Gulf, and boycotted Iranian oil for the next two years. 30 per cent of Iran's national income previously came from oil exports. Iranian production fell from 424,000 barrels a day in 1947 to 59,000 in 1954, while Saudi Arabia rose from 246,000 barrels to 953,000, and Kuwait from 45,000 barrels to 953,000.
[[Image:Mossadeghriot.jpg|350px|right|thumb|Rioters raise a poster of Mossadegh at the palace gates of the Shah in August, 1953.]]
In January 1953 the Iranian parliament extended Mossadegh's dictatorial powers. The following month, Mossadegh denounced the Shah for intrigues with "foreign interests". On February 28 the Shah announced he would abdicate "for reasons of health". Serious riots followed when the Shah's supporters clashed with Mossadegh's supporters in the streets. The Shah canceled his plan of abdication. Meanwhile, the United States ambassador presented proposals to end the impasse with the United Kingdom, one proposal was for a consortium of oil companies to replace Anglo-Iranian Oil Company and buy from Iran's nationalized industry. Mossadegh rejected the suggestion and continued to complain about the boycott.

On July 19 Mossadegh disolved the Majlis and called for a plebiscite on August 2. The Tudeh party, which was staging violent demonstrations in the streets, by the end of July openly supported Mossadegh while the [[Soviet Union]] offered desperately needed economic assistance. Mossadegh received 99.4 per cent of the vote and on August 8 Soviet Premier [[Georgy Malenkov]] told the [[Supreme Soviet]] that the Soviet Union had been conducting negotiations with Iran since June and concluded a series of agreements on border, aid, and trade issues. The Shah, who still held the position of [[Head of State]], asked for the resignation of the government and appointed a successor.

When Mossadegh received word, he began mass arrests. Two days of chaos ensued. Rioters smashed statues of the Shah and his father and screamed, "Death to the Shah!" With assurances from the CIA, the Iranian Army turned against the officers Mossadegh installed, and drove rioters off the streets. On August 19, Mossadegh turned himself over to the Shah's forces and was jailed along with Tudeh leaders. In December he was sentenced to three years in solitary confinement. The Iranian economy and living standards of the people gradually recovered as oil exports regained a market share which had been decimated during the previous two years. The Shah, who could not be seen as too close to the West because of Iran's domestic situation, nevertheless expressed his understating of the importance of Iran's position in the region, and the world, as a bulwark against [[Containment|Soviet expansionism]].

The Shah recognized and secured formal diplomatic relations with [[Israel]] and did he participate in the Arab oil embargoes during the [[Six Day War]] of 1967 and [[Yom Kippur War ]] of 1973. The US and British Mediterranean Fleets were provided with oil by the Shah. During the Yom Kippur War the Shah deterred [[Sadam Hussein]] from playing any role by moving Iranian troops to the border, and with covert aid to the [[Kurds]] of Iraq which kept the Iraqi Army diverted.

====1979-1981====
[[Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini]] emerged as an active critic of the Shah's increasingly autocratic government. Khomeini was imprisoned and later exiled, but popular anti-government sentiment continued to spread.

During the Carter presidency, the State Department’s Bureau of Human Rights was headed by Patricia Derian, who publicly deplored aspects of the Shah’s rule, particularly SAVAK, and issued low ratings for Iran’s and other pro-American government’s treatment of dissidents. Aligned with Derian in a general way was President Carter’s Ambassador to the United Nations, [[Andrew Young]], who on one occasion had referred to the Ayatollah Khomeini as a "saint." The American Ambassador to Iran, William Sullivan, a veteran diplomat of many years experience and an acute observer of the stresses in Iranian society, sought to steer a middle course through the official U.S. debates on Iran. Nevertheless, when instructed, Sullivan also would remind the Shah of the State Department’s concern (and presumably President Carter’s) about the regime’s treatment of its enemies.

By the fall of 1978, events in Iran were moving fast. The Iranian armed forces—whose officer corps had been carefully cultivated by the Shah and had sworn a personal oath of allegiance to him—witnessed the growing disorder and violence in Tehran. Knowing of the Carter administration’s discomfort at attempts to repress it, the generals nevertheless urged the Shah to crack down. The result, enacted on the 7th of September, was "martial law" without exactly being martial law. Opponents of the Shah quickly found they could challenge their sovereign’s authority and court the foreign media.

Khomeini returned from exile in France to Teheran on 31 January 1979. On 11 February the Shah fled, and mobs armed with machine guns attacked the U.S. embassy. Iran’s armed forces did not respond. On 3 November 1979, the American embassy was stormed again, and 66 U.S. personnel were taken prisoner. Thirteen were released in a few days, but the remainder stayed captive in Iran until 30 minutes after Jimmy Carter had turned the White House over to Ronald Reagan at noon on 21 January 1981. <ref>Grinter, Dr. Lawrence E. [http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1983/jan-feb/grinter.html ''Avoiding the Burden: The Carter Doctrine in Perspective''] Vol. XXXIV, No. 2 (January-February 1983): 73-82. </ref>

====1984-2001====
In 1984 the Reagan administration as part of its policy of [[Containment]], and in seeking to secure an ally for [[Israel]], sought to repair the breach that occurred with a longtime ally in 1980. [[Oliver North]] of the National Security Council staff was dispatched to Tehran with a proposal to reconcile the United States and Israels differences with the Shia Islamic regime. The proposal entailed sales of Tow missiles to help Iran break the deadlock in the trench war with Iraq. The United States and its allies feared a militarized Iraq could pose a threat to the region, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Israel, if Iraq emerged from the war as victor.

Iran needed the weapons after US arms sales were cutoff in the wake of the break in diplomatic relations. [[Iraq]] had invaded the majority [[Arab]] [[Khuzestan]] province in southwestern Iran in September 1980. The ensuing [[Iran-Iraq War]] lasted until 1988, when some naval operations by the [[United States]] against Iran impressed the impossibility of their position upon the Iranian leadership. Iran finally signed an armistice which ceded to Iraq the [[Shatt al-Arab]] waterway, the latter country's main war aim. Less than three years later, Iraq ceded it back to guarantee Iranian [[neutrality]] in the [[Gulf War]] against the United States.

After the war, Iran continued to support [[Hezbollah]], the most powerful [[Shiite]] militia in [[Lebanon]], which had waged war against the United States during the latter's intervention to end the [[1982 Israeli invasion]]. With Iran's assistance, Hezbollah launched [[terrorist]] attacks even against such clearly inoffensive countries as [[Argentina]], which seems to have been attacked because there were [[Jews]] there. The head of Iranian intelligence during the early 1990's, [[Ali Fallahian]], was indicted along with various Hezbollah operatives and an international arrest warrant was issued for him in March 2007, which the Iranians immediately appealed. This and the Iranian role in the 1996 [[Khobar Towers bombing]] prevented any normalization of relations, even after [[Mohammed Khatami]] became President of Iran in 1997 and made this one of the principal goals of his administration.

Khatami was seen by some in the West as a possible Iranian version of [[Mikhail Gorbachev]]. The [[United Kingdom]] reestablished relations with Iran in 1999. His coalition was dominated by persons who clearly wished to make Iran a normal country. However, the limitations of the President in the Iranian system allowed Iranian conservatives to marginalize his supporters and close media outlets friendly to his policies. Although he won reelection in 2001 and cooperated with the United States to some extent against their mutual enemy the [[Taliban]], his supporters were not able to take the next logical step that [[Boris Yeltsin]] and other anti-communist [[Russians]] did under Gorbachev, that is, unite to completely replace the existing political system. Because they had been able to outmaneuver him politically, Iranian conservatives also did not oblige with a corresponding [[coup d'etat]] against Khatami. Normal relations with the United States probably will require just this sort of replacement of the existing Iranian constitution, but the popularity of Khatami and congruent popular distaste for his successor indicates that may be possible without war.

====2001-present====
Iran is currently ruled by the Grand Ayatollah [[Ali Khamenei]], the second theocrat of the country, who has been in office since the death of Khomenei in 1989. He is considered to have a less extreme anti-Western bias than his predecessor. It is governed on a day-to-day basis by [[Mahmoud Ahmadinejad]], who is suspected by several Western nations to be developing nuclear weapons to use against Israel and America. Domestically, however, he is facing questioning and possible impeachment by the Iranian Parliament, who see him as too extreme.

The Iranian constitution calls for a Presidential election once every four years (in practice, the year following Presidential elections in the United States). Candidates are selected by the [[Guardian Council]], an unelected clerical body. Presidents are limited to two terms as in the United States. While since 1981 no Iranian President has been defeated for reelection, elections lacking an incumbent have been quite lively, as was the 2005 election, which Ahmadinejad only won at the runoff stage.

Beginning in 2004, U.S. President [[George W. Bush]] is reported to have signed a series of Executive Orders initiating covert operations aimed at destabilizing the Iranian regime.<ref>[http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/news/2009/intell-090113-rferl01.htm ''Reports Suggest Obama Faces Early Choice On Iran Covert Ops''], Ron Synovitz, Globalsecurity.org January 13, 2009.</ref> The CIA was authorized to supply communications equipment which would enable opposition groups in Iran to work together and bypass internet censorship by the clerical regime.<ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1552784/Bush-sanctions-black-ops-against-Iran.html ''Bush sanctions 'black ops' against Iran''], London Telegraph, 27 May 2007.</ref> During the domestic unrest following the post-election protests in which opposition groups accused the regime of rigged elections, U.S. Secretary of State [[Hillary Clinton]] urged Twitter networking service to keep the system running, leading to complaints from Iran's government. Protesters used Twitter to communicate amid the clampdown.<ref>[http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fgw-twitter18-2009jun18,0,5845567.story ''Hillary Clinton defends Twitter efforts for Iran''], L.A. Times, June 17, 2009.</ref>

==Further reading==
* Ferrier, R. W., ed. ''The Arts of Persia.'' (1989). 334 pp.
* Irving, Clive. ''Crossroads of Civilization: 3000 Years of Persian History.'' (1980). 223 pp.
* Katouzian, Homa. ''The Persians: Ancient, Mediaeval and Modern Iran'' (2009), scholarly survey
* Mackey, Sandra. ''The Iranians: Persia, Islam and the Soul of a Nation.'' (1996). 448 pp.
===Ancient===
* Allen, Lindsay. ''The Persian Empire'' (2005)
* Holland, Tom. ''Persian Fire: The First World Empire and the Battle for the West'' (2007) [http://www.amazon.com/Persian-Fire-First-Empire-Battle/dp/0307279480/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259416793&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]
* Katouzian, Homa. ''The Persians: Ancient, Mediaeval and Modern Iran'' (2009), scholarly survey
* Stierlin, Henri. ''Splendors of The Persian Empire'' (2006), art abd architecture
===Medieval to 1900===
* Morgan, David. ''Medieval Persia, 1040-1797.'' (1988). 197 pp.
* Savory, Roger. ''Iran under the Safavids.'' (1980). 277 pp. covers 1501-1722 AD.
* Foran, John. ''Fragile Resistance: Social Transformation in Iran from 1500 to the Revolution.'' (1993). 452 pp.

===20th century===
* Abrahamian, Ervand. ''Iran Between Two Revolutions'' (1982).
* Akhavi, Shahrough. ''Religion and Politics in Contemporary Iran'' (1980).
* Amid, Mohammad. ''Agriculture, Poverty and Reform in Iran'' (1990).
* Ansari, Ali. ''Modern Iran Since 1921'' (2003).
* Arjomand, Said Amir. ''The Turban for the Crown. The Islamic Revolution in Iran'' (1988).
* Bayat, Mangol. ''Iran's First Revolution'' (1991).
* Burke, Edmund, and Yaghoubian, David, eds. ''Struggle and Survival in the Modern Middle East'' (2nd ed. 2006).
* Dabashi, Hamid. ''Theology of Discontent. The Ideological Foundation of the Islamic Revolution in Iran'' (1993).
* Kamrava, Mehran. ''The Political History of Modern Iran: From Tribalism to Theocracy.'' (1992). 177 pp.
* Keddie, Nikki. ''Roots of Revolution'' (1981).
* Kedourie, Elie and Haim, Syvia G., eds. ''Towards a Modern Iran: Studies in Thought, Politics, and Society.'' (1980). 262 pp.
* McDaniel, Tim. ''Autocracy, Modernization, and Revolution in Russia and Iran'' (1991).
* Martin, Vanessa. ''Islam and Modernism'' (1989).
* Moin, Baqer. ''Khomeini: Life of the Ayatollah'' (1999).
* Schayegh, Cyrus. "Recent Trends in the Historiography of Iran under the Pahlavi Dynasty, 1921–1979" ''History Compass'' v.6 #6 (Nov. 2008) pp 1400-1406 DOI: 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2008.00558.x online
===Primary sources===
* Alexander, Yonah and Nanes, Allan, eds. ''The United States and Iran: A Documentary History.'' (1980). 524 pp.

==See also==
*[[BP]]

==References==
<references/>
[[category:Asia]]
[[category:Middle East]]
[[category:Iran]]

Gulf of Mexico oil spill

2010-08-15T21:38:45Z

ChrisGT90: The source does not say that the Deepwater Horizon approval was one of the 346 approvals made by the Obama administration since Jan 2009. Deepwater was approved long before that.

[[File:Dispersants spraying.jpg|right|300px|thumb|President Obama directed the [[United States Coast Guard]] to dump [[toxic]] disperants into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] despite known health hazards to humans and wildlife. [http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/] ]]The '''Gulf of Mexico oil spill''' began on 20 April 2010 when the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil drilling rig operated by [[BP]] (known as British Petroleum until 2000) exploded and sank.<ref>[http://www.businessinsider.com/gulf-of-mexico-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-2010-4 Here's The Questions You Should Be Asking About The Gulf Of Mexico Oil Spill]</ref> Oil began leaking at a rate eventually estimated at 2.5 million gallons per day, resulting in massive environmental degradation.<ref>[http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hSaoIddZwUtk-BTcIDuy6AjaHwSgD9GBV0GO0 Scientists: Oil leaking up to 2.52M gallons daily]</ref> The federal government reports that 206 million gallons of crude oil leaked before the spill was stopped on July 15.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38557520/ns/disaster_in_the_gulf Disaster in the Gulf]</ref> The blowout also killed eleven workers. Despite the known [[toxic]]ity of the dispersant Corexit, the [[Obama administration]] dumped millions of gallons of the hazardous chemical into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] with C-130 aircraft provided by the [[U.S. Coast Guard]]<ref>http://vodpod.com/watch/3962219-confirmed-corexit-being-sprayed-from-coast-guard-planes</ref>and the [[Air Force]].<ref>http://bpoilslick.blogspot.com/2010/07/us-air-force-sprays-corexit-from-plane.html</ref>

On 31 March 2010 [[President Obama]] announced a plan for exploitation of offshore oil reserves during a speech at Andrews Air Force Base outside [[Washington, D.C.]]<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/user/AssociatedPress#p/u/6/mA7RAfHN-wo Obama Lifts Ban on Offshore Drilling,] ''[[Associated Press]],'' 31 March 2010. Retrieved from [[Youtube]] 9 May 2010.</ref> The President's actions have been labeled, "a decision to endanger our coastal [[ecosystem]]s with the risk of catastrophic oil spills."<ref>[http://members.greenpeace.org/blog/greenpeaceusa_blog/2010/04/30/president_obama_committed_to_endangering President Obama must reinstate moratorium on offshore drilling,] [[Greenpeace]] USA blogs, 30 Apr 2010.</ref> Defending the decision, the President remarked,
{{cquote|'''oil rigs today generally don’t cause spills. They are technologically very advanced."<ref>White House Press Release, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-a-discussion-jobs-and-economy-charlotte-north-carolina Remarks by the President in a Discussion on Jobs and the Economy in Charlotte, North Carolina,] Office of the Press Secretary, April 02, 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 3 May 2010.</ref><ref>Video: [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/04/29/flashback_obama_says_oil_rigs_today_dont_generally_cause_spills.html Obama Says "Oil Rigs Today Don't Generally Cause Spills"], 2 April 2010. Retrieved from RealClearPolitics.com 12 May 2010.</ref>}}

Since January 2009 the [[Obama administration]] approved 346 oil drilling plans without securing permits required by law from the [[federal]] agency that assesses environmental impacts.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?partner=rss&emc=rss U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits,] Ian Urbina, ''New York Times'', 13 May 2010. Retrieved 28 May 2010.</ref> [[President Barack Obama]] has been widely criticized for an unprepared and bungled response, most notably from former supporters.
 

As of July 15, BP announced that the gushing well had been successfully capped, although to avoid a pressure build-up, a relief well will have to be drilled. As of August 4, only 26% of the originally leaked oil remains in the Gulf.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38557520/ns/disaster_in_the_gulf Disaster in the Gulf]</ref>

==The Obama plan ==
[[File:OCS Eastern Gulf of Mexico Strategy.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Map of expanded areas of offshore oil drilling authorized by President Obama on 31 March 2010.<ref>[http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/2010/04/01/obama-offshore-oil-drilling-details.htm Obama Offshore Oil Drilling Details,] 1 April 2010. Retrieved from About.com Guide to US Government Info 16 May 2010.</ref> ''Source: United States Department of Interior.'']]
Obama called for expanded development and production throughout the [[Gulf of Mexico]]. The [[Department of Interior]]'s [[Minerals Management Service]] (MMS) estimates that the Gulf of Mexico contains 36-41.5 billion barrels of oil and 161-207 trillion cubic feet of natural gas resources. According a DOI press release, Obama's plan would "expand oil and gas development and exploration" while "protecting fisheries, [[tourism]], and places off U.S. coasts that are not appropriate for development."<ref>[http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/2010_03_31_release.cfm Department of Interior Press Release,] 31 March 2010.</ref>

The ''[[Associated Press]]'' has reported on the role ex-government regulators play in [[lobby]]ing and influence; the chief of staff of the MSS's Gulf of Mexico region once stated that deep water drilling had "few or no regulations or standards."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/a-2649320~INFLUENCE_GAME__Govt_regulators_hired_by_companies.html INFLUENCE GAME: Govt regulators hired by companies,] Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010. Retrieved from examiner.com 26 May 2010.</ref> Two years later the senior official left his job in the MMS to work for BP.<ref>Ibid.</ref> During President Obama's first year in office, as BP's regulatory compliance and environmental manager, the ex-MMS official lobbied the U.S. Ocean Policy Task Force to "carefully weigh policies that may establish exclusionary zones" or "disrupt the MMS leasing program," according to a statement posted at whitehouse.gov.<ref>Influence Game, Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010.</ref> He further stated that BP wanted access to off-limit areas such as the eastern [[Gulf of Mexico]]<ref>Ibid.</ref> which President Obama approved in March 2010.

Total U.S. offshore [[crude oil]] production in 2009 was 1.7 million barrels a day, of which 1.6 million barrels a day came from the U.S. section of the Gulf of Mexico.<ref>[http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/info_glance/petroleum.html Energy Information Administration.]</ref>

According to the ''New York Times'', President Obama "said several times during his [[Barack Hussein Obama 2008 Presidential campaign|presidential campaign]] that he supported expanded offshore drilling. He noted in his [[State of the Union]] address<ref>[http://www.c-span.org/Executive/State-of-the-Union.aspx Barack Obama State of the Union Address 2010]. Retrieved from [[C-SPAN]].org 15 May 2010.</ref> in January [2010] that weaning the country from imported oil would require “tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development.”<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/science/earth/31energy.html Obama to Open Offshore Areas to Oil Drilling for First Time,] John M. Broder, ''[[New York Times]]'', March 30, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/03/obama_clears_way_for_oil_drill.html Obama clears way for oil drilling off U.S. coasts], Associated Press, March 31, 2010, Retrieved from nola.com 8 May 2010.</ref>

Nobel Laureate in Economics, Dr. [[Paul Krugman]],<ref>[http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2008/ Economics 2008.] Retrieved from Nobel.org 10 May 2010.</ref> who has been highly critical of Obama [[Obama administration corporate bailouts|economic policy]]<ref>[http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090331151429.aspx Krugman Garners Newsweek Cover for Left-Wing Criticism of [[Obamunism|Obamanomics,]] ] Julia A. Seymour, ''Business & Media Institute'', 3/31/09.</ref> in his regular ''New York Times'' column, ''Conscience of a Liberal'' wrote a piece entitled "The oil spill is Obama's fault," and stated "that’s not what I believe....The only question is what the story will be."<ref>[http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/the-oil-spill-is-obamas-fault/?src=twt&twt=NytimesKrugman The Oil Spill Is Obama’s Fault,] Paul Krugman, ''New York Times '' Op-Ed, 30 April 2010.</ref> When questioned about the Obama regulators "cozy relationship" with oil companies the president responded, "absolutely I take responsibility for that."<ref>[http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-gulf-oil-spill Remarks by President Obama on the Gulf Oil Spill,] Office of the Press Secretary, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 29 May 2010.</ref>
=== Obama administration asks Court to allow BP drilling in the Gulf of Mexico ===

Less than four months after [[President Barack Obama]] took office a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. found that the U.S. Government was unprepared for a major spill at sea, relying on an "irrational" environmental analysis of the risks of offshore drilling. The Obama administration urged the court to revisit the decision. In its arguments to the court, the Obama administration said that the loss of royalties on the oil, estimated at almost $10 billion, "may have significant financial consequences for the federal government."

Among the existing leases was the Lease Sale #206. That deal included BP's acquisition, for $34 million, of the acreage encompassing the Deep Water Horizons well.

A day after the administration's petition, the industry's main lobbying group, the American Petroleum Institute, made its own case echoing the government's arguments. "The significance of [Gulf of Mexico] activities under the five-year program cannot be overstated," the API argued.

Secretary [[Ken Salazar]] expressed confidence that problems within the [[Minerals Management Service]] that led to poor oversight of offshore drilling were resolved. In September 2009, in testimony before the House Natural Resources Committee, Salazar listed steps he had taken to make sure problems "don't occur in the future."

In [[Senate]] hearings held in mid-November 2009, Obama MMS Deputy Director Walter Cruickshank assured the Committee panel fears of containing a catastrophic blowout were misplaced, saying the U.S. had "what we believe is the most aggressive oil spill contingency planning...in the world."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704699604575342843359124882.html</ref>

=== Approval of BP's response plan ===
The [[Obama administration]] accepted and approved BP's regional oil spill response plan for the [[Gulf of Mexico]] dated 30 June 2009<ref>[http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1351 Did anyone actually read BP's oil spill response plan?] Walruses and Seals, Non-Existent Equipment Lists and Other Fanciful References, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from peer.org 19 June 2010.</ref> and covered all the company’s operations in the Gulf. The plan lists
:*“Sea Lions, Seals, Sea Otters [and] [[Walrus]]es” as “Sensitive Biological Resources” in the Gulf, suggesting that portions were cribbed from previous [[Arctic]] exploratory planning;
:* Gives a web site for a [[Japan]]ese home shopping site as the link to one of its “primary equipment providers for BP in the Gulf of Mexico Region [for] rapid deployment of spill response resources on a 24 hour, 7 days a week basis;” and
:* Directs its media spokespeople to never make “promises that [[property]], [[ecology]], or anything else will be restored to normal.”<ref>http://www.mms.gov/DeepwaterHorizon/BP_Regional_OSRP_Redactedv2.pdf</ref>

The government approved plan made no mention about tracking sub-surface oil plumes from deepwater blowouts or preventing [[disease]] ([[virus]]es, [[bacteria]], etc.) transmission to captured [[animal]]s in rehabilitation facilities.

=== British Petroleum ===
During the first 100 days of the [[Obama administration]], the Minerals Management Service ([[MMS]]) of the [[Department of the Interior]] granted a “categorical exclusion” from a detailed environmental impact statement required under [[law]]<ref>[http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/nepa/nepaeqia.htm The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.]</ref> to BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling operation, according to the ''[[Washington Post]].''<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html U.S. exempted BP's Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study,] Juliet Eilperin, ''Washington Post,'' 5 May 2010.</ref> BP's exploration plan received in the Administration's MMS field office on 23 March 2009 states "no mitigation measures other than those required by regulation and BP policy will be employed to avoid, diminish or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources." It declared any spill would have only "sub-lethal" effects on fish and marine [[mammal]]s but it was "unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities."<ref>http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/initial_exploration_plan050410.pdf</ref>

As Senator, and while running for president, [[Barack Obama]] received a total of $77,051 from BP<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/BP?view=detail&siteid=nwhwk</ref> and has taken more money from BP's [[Political Action Committee]] and individuals connected with BP over the past 20 years than any other candidate, according to [[FEC]] disclosure records.<ref>[http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0505/obama-biggest-recipient-bp-political-action-money-20-years Obama is biggest recipient of BP’s political action cash in the last 20 years,] John Byrne, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from rawstory.com 9 May 2010.</ref> Likewise, the independent watchdog Center for Responsive Politics noted, "the “top recipient of BP-related donations during the 2008 cycle was President Barack Obama himself.”<ref>Jake Tapper, Political Punch, [[ABC News]], 5 May 2010. [http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/white-house-idea-that-bp-given-special-exemption-because-of-campaign-cash-to-obama-silly-and-ridiculous.html?cid=6a00d8341c4df253ef0134807669a3970c]</ref><ref>http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/04/on-thursday-oil-giant-bp.html</ref>
[[File:Bp-obama-logo.jpg|right|225px|thumb|Obama approved drilling permits for BP without the statutory requirement to file an environmental impact assessment,<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?partner=rss&emc=rss U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits,] Ian Urbina, ''New York Times'', 13 May 2010.</ref> the handling of spills in a worst-case scenario,<ref>[http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2010/bp-exempted-05-05-2010.html Interior Department Exempted BP Drilling From Environmental Review]: In Rush to Expand Offshore Oil Drilling, Interior Secretary Salazar Abandoned Pledge to Reform
Industry-dominated Mineral Management Service. Press Release, Center for Biological Diversity, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from www.biologicaldiversity.org, 30 May 2010.</ref> and fostered a cozy relationship between government and the oil industry.<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=10745153 Govt Regulators Hired by Companies, Influence Game: Drilling regulators move from government to industry through revolving door,] Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010. Retrieved from abcnews.go.com 30 May 2010.</ref> No other candidate took more money from BP in the past two decades than Obama received in only six years.<ref>[http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html Obama biggest recipient of BP cash,] Erika Lovley, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from Politico.com 30 May 2010.</ref>]]
Talk show personality Ed Schultz of [[MSNBC]] reiterated a call for campaign finance reform as a result of Barack Obama's ties to BP and the government's response.<ref>[http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100602102656.aspx MSNBC's Schultz Draws Bizarre Connection Between Oil Spill and Campaign Finance Reform.] Alex Fitzsimmons, Media Research Center, 2 June 2010.</ref>

Transocean, owner of the Deepwater Horizons drilling rig leased to BP, was the recipient of the Obama [[Mineral Management Service]]'s, ''Safety Award for Excellence''.<ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=66303 Democratic Leader Hoyer Doesn’t Know Whether Obama Administration was Prepared for Oil Spill,] Matt Cover, CNSNews.com, May 20, 2010.</ref><ref>MMS Thought Deepwater Horizon was Award-Winningly SAFE, The Project on Government Oversight, Exposing Government Corruption, 29 April 2010.</ref> On 30 April 2010 Transocean's stock fell after [[President Obama]]’s chief strategist, [[David Axelrod]], made comments nine days into the disaster and the [[government]] raised estimates to more than fives times of what had previously been reported about how much oil was leaking into the [[Gulf of Mexico]].<ref>[http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-30/transocean-drops-after-axelrod-comments-on-drilling-update2-.html Transocean Drops After Axelrod Comments on Drilling,] Edward Klump, ''Bloomberg Business Week'', 30 April 2010. Retrieved 2 June 2010.</ref>

It has been reported in the [[finance|financial]] press that among owners of BP<ref>[http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-aims-at-bp-hits-state-pensions-2010-06-09 President Obama's ramped up rhetoric over the BP oil spill is beginning to have an effect,] ''MarketWatch, 9 June 2010.</ref> are
*New Jersey Division of Investment (51 million shares)
*California Public Employees Retirement System (36 million shares)
*Pennsylvania Public School Employees Retirement System (7.1 million shares)
*Teachers Retirement System of Alabama (4.5 million shares)
*Employees Retirement System of Texas (4.1 million shares)
*Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (1.1 million shares)
*Illinois State Board of Investment (1.1 million shares)<ref>In 1990 Barack Obama took a job with the Law Firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland ([http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/06/nation/na-obamalegal6 Obama's lawyer days: brief and not all civil rights,] Dan Morain, ''Los Angeles Times'' 2008-04-06). Allison S. Davis, a senior partner in the firm, went into business with [[Chicago]] slumlord [[Tony Rezko]]. Davis was appointed to the Illinois State Board of Investment by Governor [[Rod Blagojevich]] at Rezko's request in 2003. ([http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/644511 How reform-minded City Hall critic became a cozy insider,] Tim Novak, ''Chicago Sun-Times'', 2007-11-11).</ref>
*Indiana Public Employees' Retirement Fund (0.7 million shares)
*Washington State Investment Board (1.2 million shares)
*United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund (21.9 million shares).

BP was found [[Negligence|wilfully negligent]] during the [[Bush administration]] in a [[Texas]] refinery explosion incident, and was assessed $108 million in fines - the highest workplace safety fines in U.S. history.<ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/16/60minutes/main6490197_page5.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody Blowout: The Deepwater Horizon Disaster,] ''[[60 Minutes]]'', 16 May 2010. Retrieved from cbsnews.com, 2 June 2010.</ref>

=== Nalco and Corexit ===
[[File:Dermatitis4.jpg|right|375px|thumb|Dermatitis is one immediate health concern<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/28/bp-gulf-oil-spill-pollution Gulf oil spill is public health risk, environmental scientists warn,] Suzanne Goldenberg, ''[[Guardian (uk)]]'', 28 May 2010.</ref> of the [[Obama administration]]'s decision to use [[toxic]] substances to disperse the visibility of the spill.
[http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CB4QFjAD&url=http://www.chemie.uni-regensburg.de/Physikalische_Chemie/Kunz/student/Uebung_Formulierung/Clark_presentation.pdf&rct=j&q=photo+dermatitis+corexit&ei=qn0ITPGEM-qXlAfeo8TSAQ&usg=AFQjCNHp_FTjbxFEzZI4o9iMcapG_kFO3Q&sig2=zxmIoVnIi2vekrq3WB6ztA]Residents, cleanup workers, and tourists alike may be affected. [http://chealth.canoe.ca/channel_health_news_details.asp?news_id=31005&news_channel_id=145&channel_id=145] ]]
Nalco of Naperville, Illinois formed a joint venture with Exxon Chemical in 1994 and the company's current leadership includes several executives from BP. Nalco reported it sold in excess of $40 million to BP of its dispersant, Corexit, shortly after the [[Gulf of Mexico]] oil spill disaster.

Of 18 dispersants approved by the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA), 12 were found to be more effective on southern [[Louisiana]] crude than Corexit, EPA data show.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/business/energy-environment/13greenwire-less-toxic-dispersants-lose-out-in-bp-oil-spil-81183.html Less Toxic Dispersants Lose Out in BP Oil Spill Cleanup,]
Paul Quinlan, ''Greenwire'', May 13, 2010. Retrieved from nytimes.com 25 May 2010.</ref> Two of the 12 were found to be 100 percent effective on [[Gulf of Mexico]] crude, whereas two Corexit products rated only 56 percent and 63 percent effective.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The [[toxic]]ity of the other 12 was shown to be in some cases 10 or 20 times less than Corexit, according to the EPA.<ref>Ibid.</ref> "It's a chemical that the oil industry makes to sell to itself, basically," said Richard Charter, a senior policy adviser for Defenders of Wildlife.<ref>Ibid.</ref>

Corexit was found to be one of the most toxic dispersal agents ever developed.<ref>''Acute Aquatic Toxicity of Three Corexit Products: An Overview'', Anita George-Ares and James R. Clark. Report prepared for Exxon Biomedical Sciences.</ref> With seasonal warming of water temperature the toxicity grows. Corexit is banned in the [[United Kingdom]] due to [[environment]]al concerns.<ref>[http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/05/epa-bp-dispersants Why Is the EPA Letting BP Use Dirty Dispersants?], Kate Sheppard, ''Mother Jones'', 19 May 19 2010.</ref> The Obama EPA gave BP the green light to apply Corexit to the spill.<ref>Ibid.</ref> At the Congressional hearing investigating the Gulf oil spill disaster, [[Democratic]] Representative Jerrold Nadler of [[New York]] raised the prospect of "thousands and thousands of people getting sick or dying" as a result of the administration's sanctioned use of the dispersant.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/science/earth/28workers.html Worry About Dispersant Rises as Men in Work Crew Complain of Health Problems,] Leslie Kaufman and Elizabeth Rosenthal, ''New York Times'', 27 May 2010.</ref> Critics allege use of dispersants like Corexit are largely for cosmetic purposes. Nalco has been a frequent contributor to the campaign of Sen. [[Mary Landrieu]]<ref>http://saveourwetlands.org/index-landrieu.html/</ref> of Louisiana.<ref>http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/fec/?id=273&cycle=2007-2008</ref>

== Deepwater Horizon ==
[[File:Deepwater Horizon Fire.jpg|right|250px|thumb|Fire boat response crews battle the blazing remnants of the off shore oil rig Deepwater Horizon, April 21, 2010 (U.S. Coast Guard)]]
On [[Earth Day]] 2010, a BP-leased oil drilling rig sank to the bottom of the [[Gulf of Mexico]] two days after it exploded, creating what has been described as the "worst environmental disaster in [[American History Lectures|US history]]."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/x-33986-Political-Spin-Examiner~y2010m4d29-Worst-environmental-disaster-in-US-history-Oil-slick-in-Gulf-of-Mexico-is-set-on-fire Worst environmental disaster in US history,] Maryann Tobin, ''Examiner'', April 29, 2010.</ref> [[Secretary of the Interior]] [[Ken Salazar]] told [[CNN]] "It potentially is catastrophic," and "I think we have to prepare for the worst."<ref>[http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/gulf-oil-spill:-impossible-to-measure-impact-of-%22unprecedented-environmental-disaster%22-477603.html?tickers=BP,HAL,CAM,RIG,XLE,OIL,USO Gulf Oil Spill: Impossible to Measure Impact of "Unprecedented Environmental Disaster",] Aaron Task, May 03, 2010. Retrieved from Yahoo Finance 12 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/02/salazar-oil-spill-massive-and-a-potential-catastrophe/ Salazar: Oil spill 'massive' and a potential catastrophe,] [[CNN]], 3 May 2010.</ref>

Congressional investigators think they have identified the rigs blowout preventer as the cause of the explosion. <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703339304575240323493707434.html Congress Homes In on Rig's Blowout Preventer,] Ben Casselman and Jennifer Levitz, ''Wall Street Journal Online,'' 13 May 2010.</ref> The blowout preventer was leaking hydraulic fluid, had a dead battery,<ref>Ibid.</ref> and was inspected by the Obama [[Minerals Management Service]] (MMS) only two weeks before to the explosion<ref>White House Press Office, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/press-briefing-bp-oil-spill-gulf-coast Press Briefing on the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf Coast,] 29 April 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 12 May 2010.</ref> which killed 11 people. [[Amy Goodman]], a [[leftist]] radio talk show host, has suggested those responsible should be [[prosecute]]d for [[manslaughter]].<ref>[http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/law_order_corporate_crime_unit_20100518/ Law & Order,] Amy Goodman, 18 May 2010. Retrieved from truthdigg.com 30 May 2010.</ref>

Blowout preventers are meant to shut off the well, and the last line of defense is a set of shear rams which cut the pipe and seal off the well.<ref>Congress Homes In on Rig's Blowout Preventer, Ben Casselman and Jennifer Levitz, ''WSJ Online,'' 13 May 2010.</ref> The MMS, the [[Obama administration]] agency that regulates offshore drilling along with the Coast Guard, is supposed to require proof that shear rams are powerful enough to shut the well. Michael Saucier, MMS's regional supervisor testified before Congress that the MMS did not require BP to file a "scenario for potential blowout."<ref>Ibid.</ref> The MMS certified that BP "has the capacity to respond, to the maximum extent practicable, to a worst-case discharge, or a substantial threat of such a discharge."<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/29/gulf-oil-spill-exceeds-bp_n_556798.html</ref>

A May 2010 Inspector General's report revealed at least two MMS regulatory inspectors admitted to being under the influence of the [[illegal drug]] [[methamphetamine]] while on the job.<ref>[http://www.wusf.usf.edu/news/2010/05/25/drugs_free_football_tickets_and_porn_at_minerals_management_service Drugs, Free Football Tickets and Porn at Minerals Management Service,] 25 May 2010. Retrieved from wusf.usf.edu 26 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.tgdaily.com/business-and-law-features/49932-us-bureaucrats-smoked-crystal-meth-watched-porn-as-bp-oil-rig-blew US bureaucrats smoked crystal meth, watched porn as BP oil rig blew,] Starr Keshet, 25 May 2010. Retrieved from tgdaily.com 26 May 2010.</ref>

==Environmental disaster ==
[[File:Oil slick map.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Projections of the flow of the spill over the summer of 2010. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37497578/ns/local_news-new_york_ny/] ]]
On 29 April 2010 oil began washing ashore in Plaquemines Parish, [[Louisiana]]; four weeks later local leaders still were begging [[President Obama]] for federal assistance in responding to the disaster which was overtaking hundreds of miles of shoreline.<ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/26/gulf.oil.spill.plaquemines/index.html Plaquemines Parish president blasts federal response to oil spill,] CNN, 26 May 2010.</ref>

Crude oil has washed into marshes, estuaries and onto beaches in [[Mississippi]] and [[Alabama]]. Wildlife has been killed and efforts are underway to save oil-coated
birds. Without capping the well [[Florida]]'s Everglades may be turned into a "dead zone." Scientists expect currents to carry the oil slick to the eastern seaboard of the [[United States]], fouling beaches and estuaries like the [[Chesapeake Bay]] and fishing grounds of the Grand Banks off [[Newfoundland]].

=== Silverfish ===

Most scientists agree that Corexit 9500 will have a much larger biological effect when it reaches coastal areas teeming with wildlife.<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref> Many species are being threatened at a crucial time in their life cycle.<ref>[http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2818588720100428 FACTBOX-Possible environmental impact of Gulf oil spill,] ''[[Reuters]]'', 28 April 2010.</ref> In testing done by the U.S. [[Environmental Protection Agency]] the dispersant Corexit 9500 was found to be extremely lethal to silverfish, a benchmark [[organism]] in [[toxic]]ity testing.<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>

=== Gulf menhaden ===

Gulf menhaden are a [[specie]]s harvested mostly for fish meal and fish oil. Menhaden could be badly affected
by the spill.

=== Coral, oyster and shrimp ===

Corals, oyster and shrimp likewise are critically affected. Richard Charter, a foremost expert on marine biology and oil spills who is a senior policy advisor for Marine Programmes for Defenders of Wildlife and is chairman of the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council has said, “There is a [[chemical]] [[toxic]]ity to the dispersant compound that in many ways is worse than oil,” which "in so doing you may be more seriously damaging the ecosystem offshore.”<ref>Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic. Retreived from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref> Shrimp were found to be extremely vulnerable to the lethal effects of the chemical dispersant Corexit 9500 used by [[Obama administration]] disaster relief agencies and BP in testing done by the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA).<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>

=== Brown pelican ===
[[File:Dead birds and sea turtles.jpg|right|325px|thumb|Dead birds and sea turtles. ]]
The [[Louisiana]] state bird, the Brown Pelican, was removed from protection under the U.S. Endangered Species Act in 2009. The Obama administration approved BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling rig without the proper environmental impact assessment (EIA) required by law. The disaster occurred just as breeding season commenced.

=== Other bird species ===

Other species endangered by the oil spill are American oystercatcher and Wilson's plover.

=== Sea turtles ===

As several species of sea turtles move through the Gulf during their spring nesting season, they need to surface to breathe.

=== Toxic oil spill rain ===
A report prepared by the [[Russia]]n Ministry of Natural Resources warned that the leaking [[crude oil]] into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] is about to become the worst [[environment]]al catastrophe in all of human history, threatening the entire eastern half of [[North America]] with “total destruction.” Russian scientists based the assessment on the use of millions of gallons of the government approved chemical dispersant Corexit.

The Russian scientists outlined that Corexit, with its 2.61ppm [[toxic]]ity level, combined with the seasonal warming of Gulf of Mexico waters, the [[molecule]]s will be able to “phase transition” from their present [[liquid]] to a gaseous state allowing them to be absorbed into clouds and released as “toxic rain” upon all of Eastern North America.

The scientists warned should a [[Hurricane Katrina]] like storm form in the Gulf while tens of millions of gallons of Corexit are floating on or near the surface, the resulting “toxic rain” falling upon the North American continent could “theoretically” destroy all microbial life to any depth it reaches resulting in an “unimaginable environmental catastrophe” destroying all kinds of life forms.<ref>[http://www.eutimes.net/2010/05/toxic-oil-spill-rains-warned-could-destroy-north-america/ Toxic oil spill rains warned could destroy North America,'] EUTimes, 24 May 2010. Retrieved 3 June 2010.</ref>

== The response ==

Initially [[Department of Homeland Security]] and the [[U.S. Coast Guard]] reported on 23 April 2010 there was no leak from the sunken oil rig.<ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-04-23-deepwater-horizon_N.htm Coast Guard: No oil leaking from sunken rig,] Rick Jervis, ''[[USA TODAY]]'', 23 April 2010.</ref> The next day the [[Obama administration]] officially estimated a leak from the sunken well at 1000 barrels per day.<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/24/oil-rig-deepwater-horizon_0_n_550849.html Oil Rig, Deepwater Horizon, Leaking Into Gulf Of Mexico,] Cain Burdeau, 4 April 2010. Retrieved from the ''[[Huffington Post]],'' 15 May 2010.</ref> The ''[[Associated Press]]'' reported it took nine days after the explosion and loss of life before President Obama made his first comments on the disaster.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100509/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_gulf_oil_spill_obama_s_response Obama oil response: aggressive as crisis unfolded,] ,H. Josef Hebert and Erica Werner, ''Associated Press'', 9 May 2010. Retrieved from news.yahoo.com 2 June 2010.</ref> BP's stock fell<ref>[http://in.reuters.com/article/idINLDE63S0HR20100429 European shares turn negative; BP falls,] ''Reuters'' 29 April 2010.</ref> on news of the "the worsening oil spill" and administration estimates were raised to 5000 barrels per day.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/29/us/29spill.html Size of Spill in Gulf of Mexico Is Larger Than Thought,] Campbell Robertson and Leslie Kaufman, ''New York Times,'' 28 April 2010. Retrieved 15 May 2010.</ref> and appointed a national incident commander.<ref>http://wallstcheatsheet.com/breaking-news/a-timeline-of-the-bp-oil-spill-crisis-pics/?p=10743/</ref>

=== U.S. Government dumps toxic dispersants into the Gulf of Mexico ===
[[File:Dispersants spraying.jpg|left|300px|thumb|Aerial image of the [[United States]] [[government]]'s dumping [[toxic]] disperants into the [[Gulf of Mexico]]. ]]
''Wired Science'' reports the [[Obama administration]] disaster-relief agencies are using a toxic chemical to disperse oil in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster. Use of dispersants are said to be a public relations strategy.<ref>[http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/05/gulf-dispersants/ Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative,] Brandon Keim, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from ''Wired Science'' 15 May 2010.</ref> Secretary [[Janet Napolitano]] of the [[Department of Homeland Security]] acknowledged<ref>[http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/ Obama: Oil spill bill on BP, Chem spray to save nature,] Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Updates, 04th May 2010. Retrieved from oilspillupdates.com 29 May 2010.</ref> the U.S government was dumping toxic chemicals from [[C-130]] cargo aircraft onto the spill.<ref>[http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2010-05-02/news/os-oil-disaster-chemical-cleanup-20100502_1_dispersant-spill-crude Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix,] Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref> Jackie Savitz of the ocean-conservation group Oceana stated the use of dispersants is only slightly less horrendous than the Gulf oil spill itself. "You're basically pouring chemicals into the ocean, which is never a good thing."<ref>Ibid.</ref> According to a 2009 [[Environmental Protection Agency]] report dispersants have not been used in the United State prior to the Obama administration's approval at BP'S request "because of possible long-term environmental effects, difficulties with timely and effective application, disagreement among [[scientist]]s and research data about their environmental effects, effectiveness, and [[toxic]]ity concerns" and the effects "are still unknown."<ref>Ibid.</ref> Residents in areas close to the oil spill have reported odors and symptoms such as [[headache]]s, dizziness, [[nausea]], eye irritation, and respiratory problems.<ref>[http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/gsolomon/gulf_oil_spill_air_quality_upd.html Gulf Oil Spill Air Quality,] Gina Solomon, 24 May 2010. Retrieved from Natural Resources Defense Council Staff Blog, 3 June 2010.</ref>

=== Disregard for worker safety ===
[[File:Cleaup300.jpg|right|275px|thumb|Cleanup workers exposed to the Obama adminsitration's decision to use known [[toxic]] substances to disperse the spill. Critics allege dispersants are ineffective and largely for cosmetic purposes. ]]
The ''[[Guardian (uk)]]'' has reported the controversy over Corexit exposes the [[Obama administration]] to criticism that its scientific agencies have been too accommodating to BP's strategy. In addition to the use of Corexit, the Obama [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA) came under fire for withholding test results on the toxicity of the water close to shore.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/20/gulf-oil-spill-chemical-dispersant</ref>

The dispersant 2-BE is known to cause heath dangers to clean up workers<ref>http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/gsolomon/oil_spill_clean-up_workers_get.html</ref> and wildlife alike.<ref>[http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2010/chem_dispersants_work_at_cost Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic.] Retrieved from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref> 2-BE has been documented to cause the breakdown of [[red blood cell]]s, leading to blood in urine and feces, and can damage the kidneys, liver, spleen and [[bone marrow]] of humans – effects not included on the information sheet for workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The dispersant Corexit 9500 is associated with headaches, vomiting and reproductive problems as sides effects to clean-up workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref> Lawrence Duffy of the University of Alaska claims dispersants "are more a public relations measure than a preventive one. It has an effect on our psychology because we don't see the oil slick,"<ref>Ibid.</ref> though oil particles continue to do damage.<ref>Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix, Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref>

=== Government mismanagement of relief efforts ===

Three weeks into the disaster [[National Public Radio]] reported the [[Obama administration]]'s official figures were still grossly underestimated<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126809525 Gulf Spill May Far Exceed Official Estimates,] Richard Harris, ''National Public Radio,'' 14 May 2010.</ref> and after the first month it was finally admitted the spill was nearly three times larger than earlier thought.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/us/28flow.html Estimates Suggest Spill Is Biggest in U.S. History,] Tom Zeller, Jr., ''New York Times'', 27 May 2010.</ref>

Federal officials did not begin burning the leaking oil off the surface of the water until one full week after the rig collapsed.<ref>[http://blog.al.com/live/2010/04/burning_should_have_started_a.html Burning should have started a week ago, former NOAA official says,] Ben Raines, ''Mobile Press-Register'', 29 April 2010.</ref> Louisiana Governor [[Bobby Jindal]] criticized [[President Obama]] for his slow response.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzEntQPr9OA</ref> ''The New York Times'' castigated the [[White House]] for delays and not moving quick enough, calling the evidence "damning" and declaring the Gulf oil spill a "huge disaster whose consequences might have been minimized with swifter action" from the [[Obama administration]].<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/01/opinion/01sat1.html Unanswered Questions on the Spill,] ''New York Times'' Editorial, 30 April 2010.</ref> One month into the spill, [[Democrat]]ic stalwarts [[James Carville]],<ref>[http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2521614/posts Is James Carville racist?], 26 May 2010. Retrieved from freerepublic.com 30 May 2010.</ref> [[Chris Matthews]],<ref>http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37632.html#ixzz0om46RhGH</ref> and Donna Brazile<ref>http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/99375-donna-brazile-calls-obamas-oil-spill-response-not-tough-enough</ref> criticized the inept and bungled response to the spreading catastrophe.
[[File:Finalisttransoce.jpeg|left|250px|thumb|Chris Oynes (left) of the Mineral Management Service presents Keelan Adamson (right) of Transocean the MMS's, ''Safety Award for Excellence'' (SAFE),<ref>http://www.mms.gov/awards/SAFEcriteria.htm</ref> at the MMS National Award luncheon, 7 May 2009.<ref>http://www.beaconmag.com/gomrigteamswinmm.html</ref> ''Source: Beacon magazine'']]
The [[White House]] lacked any type of plan to combat the disaster. [[U.S. House of Representatives|House]] Democratic Majority Leader [[Steny Hoyer]] publicly admitted that the [[Obama Administration]] was ill-prepared to deal with the situation. <ref>[http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2010/04/mms-thought-deepwater-horizon-was-awardwinningly-safe.html MMS Thought Deepwater Horizon was Award-Winningly SAFE,] The Project on Government Oversight, Exposing Government Corruption, 29 April 2010.</ref> While the disaster steadily grew, Obama did not discuss the crisis at length until he appeared at a photo op at Venice, Louisiana on 3 May 2010.<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126467960 Obama Says Oil Spill Damage Could Be Unprecedented,] Scott Horsley, [[NPR]], 3 May 2010.</ref> He would order a moratorium on all future deep sea oil platforms until they determine the problems associated with the current situation. As to be expected, Obama tries to remove himself from blame saying "the system failed", this despite the fact the he heads the system. Then he pointed fingers of blame at oil companies while taking an indirect jab at the Bush administration. <ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20005039-503544.html Angry Obama Seeks to Deflect Blame for Gulf Oil Spill Crisis, CBS, May 14, 2010]</ref>
{{cquote|For too long, for a decade or more, there has been a cozy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agency that permits them to drill. It seems as if permits were too often issued based on little more than assurances of safety from the oil companies. That cannot and will not happen anymore.}}
White House spokesman [[Robert Gibbs]] did his best to put a good spin on the disaster claiming the response was "comprehensive and fast." Meanwhile, the [[Democrat]]-led Congress ordered public hearings from oil executives. President Obama blamed others saying the answers from oil executives were a "ridiculous spectacle," "You had executives of BP and Transocean and Halliburton falling over each other to point the finger of blame at somebody else." <ref>[http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/burning_rig_of_fire_VkeuMCffwTUd9IBS7gUV7K?CMP=OTC-rss&FEEDNAME=#ixzz0oWm4u9zQ New look at Gulf oil spill as cleanup continues, NYPost, May 15, 2010]</ref> As the disaster progressed and questions arose over the government's misreporting and withholding<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/bp-feds-withheld-videos-showing-massive-scope-oil/story?id=10819367 BP and Feds Withheld Videos Showing Massive Scope of Oil Spill:] Coast Guard Told Public Not to 'Fixate' On Rate of Spill While Sitting On Video, Brian Ross, Matthew York, and Avni Patel, ABC News, 3 June 2010.</ref> of information from the [[public]] about the true dimensions of the calamity, the ''[[Associated Press]]'' noted,
{{cquote|First [Obama] was going to make BP pay for the Gulf oil mess. Then he declared himself in charge. Now he's trying to find out 'whose ass to kick' and making clear he'd fire BP's chief if only he could.<ref>http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100608/D9G7C5U00.html</ref>}}
[[File:Energy Tax bill.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Estimated impact of Obama Energy Tax in job losses. Total job loss: 2.2 million. ''Source: National Black Chamber of Commerce'' [http://www.nationalbcc.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=750:nbcc-study-generates-concerns-about-waxmanmarkey-climate-change-bill-costs-are-high-but-benefits-are-uncertain&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=7] ]]
=== Revitalizing cap and trade energy tax ===
:''Main article:'' '''[[Cap and trade]]'''
[[President Obama]] has been roundly criticized by [[Democrat]]s and [[Republican]]s alike for attempting to use the [[nation]]al tragedy to revitalized his failed Cap and Trade energy proposals. The Obama proposal, widely perceived as a job-killer tax increase, has stalled in the [[U.S. Senate]]. [[California]] Senator [[Dianne Feinstein]] has stated the climate bill "isn't going to stop the oil leak."<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/15/obamas-pitch-energy-speech-gulf-crisis-infuriates-republicans/ Obama Draws Bipartisan Criticism for Using Oil Spill to Push Energy Policy,] [[FOXNews]].com, 16 June 2010.</ref>

[[Environmentalist]]s want the President to push the program. Fred Krupp of the Environmental Defense Fund calls the opportunity "a political moment" to pass a carbon tax estimated to cost the average U.S. household $4300 per year.<ref>[http://blog.heritage.org/2009/05/15/the-4300-energy-tax/ The $4300 Energy Tax,] Nicolas Loris, 15 May 2009. Retrieved from Heritage.org, 19 June 2010.</ref>

Joel Benenson, who conducted polling for Obama’s presidential campaign, thinks the tax increase could pass, but wary Senate Democrats say otherwise. “There’s not a great call for it" said [[West Virginia]] Democratic Senator [[Jay Rockefeller]]. “It’s unrelated” to the immediate crisis in the Gulf noted Senator [[Ben Nelson]], Democrat from [[Nebraska]].<ref>[http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-16/democrats-say-climate-bill-lacks-momentum-after-spill-update3-.html Democrats Say Climate Bill Lacks Momentum After Spill,] Lisa Lerer and Simon Lomax, ''Bloomberg'', 16 June 2010. </ref>

=== Assistance of foreign governments ===
Nearly two-months after the disaster took place, the Obama administration decides to utilize the assistance offered by 17 countries, the U.N and the European Union. <ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/13/AR2010061304232.html After delays, [[U.S.]] begins to tap foreign aid for gulf oil spill, WaPo, June 14, 2010]</ref> International aid offers already accepted include two skimmers and 2.6 miles (4.2 kilometers) of boom from [[Mexico]], three sets of sweeping arm systems from the Netherlands and 1.86 miles (3.0 kilometers) of boom from Canada, the State Department said. The State Department noted that it has assisted BP in directly sourcing equipment and technical experts from around the world, including from Algeria, Australia, Bahrain, [[Brazil]], [[Canada]], China, Denmark, Latvia, Norway, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, and the [[United Kingdom]]. <ref>[http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/breakingnews/view/20100615-275709/US-taps-into-foreign-assistance-for-Gulf-oil-spill US taps into foreign assistance for Gulf oil spill, Agence France-Presse, June 15, 2010]</ref>

===Public relations offensive===
Faced with declining poll numbers and a public relations calamity, [[President Obama]] took to the airwaves nearly 60 days into the spill. A ''New York Times'' Op-ed commented,
{{cquote|All we got from President Obama was a vague call for some sort of new energy policy. Plus a Gulf Coast Restoration Plan, an oil spill study commission, a reminder that the secretary of energy won a Nobel Prize in physics and 17 references to God, prayer, blessings or faith.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/opinion/17collins.html The Boring Speech Policy,] Gail Collins, ''New York Times'' Op-ed, 16 June 2010.</ref><ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2010/06/17/behar-laments-shocking-bush-obama-garofalo-slams-anti-intellectual-pr Behar Panel Sees '[[Bush]]-Like' and '[[Corporatist]]' [[Obama]], [[Janeane Garofalo|Garofalo]] Slams 'Anti-Intellectual' [[Prayer]],] Joy Behar Show, [[CNN]]. Retrieved from newsbusters.org, 20 June 2010.</ref>}}
Former speechwriter for President [[Jimmy Carter]], [[Chris Matthews]], chided the President after his address to the nation,
{{cquote|Ludicrous that he keeps saying [Secretary of Energy] [[Steven Chu|Chu]] has a [[Nobel prize]]. I'll barf if he does it one more time.<ref>[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/06/15/msnbc_trashes_obamas_address_compared_to_carter_i_dont_sense_executive_command.html MSNBC Trashes Obama's Address: Compared To Carter, "I Don't Sense Executive Command,"]. Retrieved from RealClearPolitics.com, 20 June 2010.</ref>}}

==Economic impacts==
[[File:Oilslick.png|right|275px|thumb| Oil slick map as of May 30, 2010.]]
The economic impact of the [[Gulf of Mexico]] oil drilling disaster will be large and devastating to several key industries, including fishing, tourism, and transportation.<ref>[http://www.ihsglobalinsight.com/Perspective/PerspectiveDetail18638.htm Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Gulf Coast Oil Spill,] Nariman Behravesh, 4 May 2010. Retrieved from ihsglobalinsights.com 8 May 2020.</ref>

The top commercial species in terms of value are shrimp ($367 million), menhaden ($64 million), oysters ($59 million), and blue crab ($38 million).<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Fisheries Economics of the United States, Silver Spring, MD, 2008.</ref> As of 25 May 2010, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) closed 54,096 square miles to commercial and recreational fishing.<ref>http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/deepwater_horizon_oil_spill.htm</ref> These areas are some of the richest fishing grounds in the Gulf of Mexico for major commercial species such as white shrimp, blue crab, and oysters.

===Employment in fishing===
The most immediate economic impact of the oil spill has been on the Gulf fishing<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/video/asset/fishing-industry-hammered-by-gulf-oil-spill/41612D0E-B338-464D-A15E-5885B1D227D6</ref> industry. The number of [[job]]s at stake, which includes seafood processing and related wholesale and retail, is over 200,000 with related [[economic]] activity of $5.5 billion.<ref>[http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41262.pdf Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Selected Issues for Congress,] Curry L. Hagerty and Jonathan L. Ramseur, Congressional Research Service, 27 May 2010. (pdf p. 2.).</ref>

Dockside sales in [[Louisiana]] are approximately $660 million.<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Departtment of Commerce, [http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st5/publication/econ/2008/FEUS%202008%20ALL.pdf Fisheries Economics of the United States,] Silver Spring, MD, 2008. (pdf).</ref> Loses to the Louisiana fishing could be as high as $2.5 billion.<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/story/insurers-brace-for-liability-hit-from-oil-spill-2010-05-05</ref>

===Employment in tourism===

The tourist industry employs 620,000 people who earn over $9 billion in wages in the Gulf of Mexico region. Analysts say [[Florida]] alone could lose $3 billion in tourism.<ref>[http://www.royalgazette.com/rg/Article/article.jsp?articleId=7da532730030019&sectionId=65 Insurance industry concern grows over oil spill liability,] Alistair Barr, ''Royal Press Gazette'', 6 May 2010.</ref>

In 2008, recreational anglers took 25.4 million fishing trips and spent over $12 billion on equipment and trips in the Gulf region.<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Fisheries Economics of the United States, Silver Spring, MD, 2008.</ref> Some of the most popular recreational species include snappers, several types of drum, sheepshead, and Spanish mackerel. Recreational fisheries support businesses such as charters, bait and tackle, and services such as restaurants and hotels.

In 2000, 21.9 million people visited Gulf beaches and accounted for 177.2 million beach days.<ref>Brent Ache, David Bylsma, and Kristen Crossett, et al., The Gulf of Mexico at a Glance, National Ocean Service, NOAA, A Tool for the Gulf of Mexico Alliance and the American Public, Washington, DC, 2008. [http://gulfofmexicoalliance.org/pdfs/gulf_glance_1008.pdf pdf].</ref>

===Transportation===
The Offshore Marine Service Association (OMSA),<ref>[http://www.marinelog.com/DOCS/NEWSMMIX/2010jun00034.html OMSA slams offshore drilling moratorium,] 3 June 2010. Retrieved from Marinelog.com, 19 June 2010.</ref> the national trade association for U.S. flag vessels in the energy sector, criticized the [[Obama administration]]'s moratorium on offshore drilling projects. 100,000 jobs were immediately affected by the president's decision as companies began cancelling contracts to carry supplies, forcing layoffs. "The industry has struggled to climb out of a severe economic downturn. The moratorium threatens any hope of recovery and creates the potential for economic hardship that could last a decade or longer," remarked OMSA President Ken Wells.

OMSA estimates that for every mariner who works on-board a vessel, there are nine other Americans working in shore-side jobs that support vessel operations. Beyond the vessel crew, the negative consequences of the moratorium could impact everyone from service technicians supporting everything from diesel engines to the air condition systems to the local grocer who supplies food for the boat's galley.

Offshore vessels are a major part of the tax base in many coastal communities. Gulf Coast state and local government revenues will also decrease due to lower [[income tax]] and [[sales tax]] collections.

Disruption of shipping traffic in and out of the Port of [[New Orleans]] will impact barge, container, and tanker traffic in the Mississippi Delta and along the [[Mississippi River]]. Prices of all types of commodities would affected.

=== Insurance industry ===

BP, the operator on the oil drilling lease with a 65% stake, insured itself, rather than buying coverage from insurance companies. Industry analysts estimate total costs related to the oil spill cleanup and damages could exceed $14 billion. <ref>[http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKLDE6410IJ20100502 U.S. oil spill could bill could exceed $14 billion,] Tom Bergin, ''Reuters,'' 2 May 2010.</ref>

=== Lost revenue to state and local governments ===
:'''Louisiana'''
A Greater New Orleans study indicates the [[Obama administration]]'s moratorium could cost [[Louisiana]] as many as 22,000 jobs and more than $782 million in revenues.

With the average deepwater rig employing 230 workers with an average salary of $98,000, the study puts the tax revenue impact at $151 million if drilling were to resume within 18 months. Greater New Orleans President and CEO Michael Hecht says it’s difficult to be optimistic based on President Obama’s [[Oval Office]] address on 15 June 2010. President Obama's action “has the potential to turn an ecological tragedy into an economic calamity,” Hecht said.<ref>[http://neworleanscitybusiness.com/blog/2010/06/16/study-moratorium-could-cost-up-to-22000-jobs-782m-in-lost-revenue/ Study: Moratorium could cost up to 22,000 jobs, $782M in lost revenue,] Greg LaRose, ''New Orleans City Business'', 16 June 2010.</ref> The study foresees in a worse case scenario the loss of more than 22,000 jobs, 3,450 of them directly tied to the operating rigs and 18,945 with indirect ties such as catering firms and other companies that serve U.S energy producers.

Fearing that the drilling moratorium "could exacerbate, rather than alleviate, the impacts of this spill upon both our [[economy]] and our [[environment]]," U.S. Senator [[Mary Landrieu]] wrote to President Obama on 11 June 2010.<ref>http://landrieu.senate.gov/mediacenter/pressreleases/06-11-2010-1.cfm</ref> Landrieu stated,
{{Cquote|more than 300,000 Louisianians are employed either directly or indirectly by the oil and gas industry. ..The immediate impacts to the economy are devastating enough: idling the 33 rigs currently permitted to drill in the deepwater Gulf would immediately impact [[employment]] for roughly 38,000 crewmen, deck hands, engineers, welders, ROV operators, caterers, helicopter pilots, and others who operate and service these vessels. That's like closing 12 large motor vehicle assembly plants in one state, all at once.}}

Lost state and local tax revenues will accrue at a rate between $8 million and $15 million a month. Federal royalty losses will be substantial and a significant drop in tolls collected for the Louisiana Highway 1 bridge at Leeville, the main artery to the Port Fourchon energy port is projected as well.
:'''Texas'''
The [[Texas]] state comptroller’s office reported collection of $2.3 billion in oil and natural gas production taxes in fiscal year 2009 and $4.1 billion in 2008. The tax revenue is used to repair roads and fund schools, among other state services. Although no official analysis of President Obama's decision to place a moratorium on offshore production has been compiled yet, the Texas comptroller’s office said it’s unclear how much of an impact the president's decision will have on state services. Experts warn the president's decision could threaten tens of thousands of jobs in the [[Houston]] area.<ref>[http://www.kvue.com/news/state/Deepwater-drilling-moratorium-threatens-Texas-tax-revenue-95848579.html Deepwater drilling moratorium threatens Texas' tax revenue,] Gabe Gutierrez, 8 June 2010. Retrieved from kvue.com, 20 June 2010.</ref>
:'''Alabama'''
Manufacturing jobs in [[Alabama]] are at risk as a result of [[President Obama]]'s actions, as no new orders for equipment are coming in.<ref>[http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=94652 NOIA Member Cos Feel Drilling Moratorium Impacts,] National Ocean Industries Association, 11 June 2010.</ref>

=== Increased dependency on foreign oil ===

[[New Jersey]] Democrat Senator [[Robert Menendez]] proposed a ban on new offshore drilling permits and submitted a bill that would retroactively raise the financial liability of BP from $75 million to $10 billion. <ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/05/senator-menendez-on-oil-spill-no-new-drilling-permits.html Senator Menendez on Oil Spill: No New Drilling Permits, ABCNews, May 12, 2010]</ref> Oklahoma [[Republican]] Senator [[James Inhofe]] successfully killed the bill saying it would reduce competition and shut down smaller independent oil companies in favor of larger companies.

=== Too big to fail ===
An oil industry trade publication<ref>[http://oilprice.com/Environment/Oil-Spills/The-Cover-up-BP-s-Crude-Politics-and-the-Looming-Environmental-Mega-Disaster.html The Cover-up: BP's Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster,] Wayne Madsen, 06 May 2010. Retrieved from oilprice.com 6 June 2010.</ref> reports [[President Obama]] and senior White House staff, as well as Interior Secretary [[Ken Salazar]], are working with BP on [[legislation]] that would raise the cap on [[liability]] for damage claims from those affected by the oil disaster from $75 million to $10 billion. However the disaster has the real potential of costing nearly $1 trillion. Critics point out that in the deal between Obama and BP, $10 billion is a drop in the bucket for a trillion dollar disaster. Talk is noted in government circles, including [[FEMA]], of the need to nationalize BP in order to compensate those who will ultimately be affected by the worst oil disaster in the history of the world, and BP would, if its assets were nationalized, be credited with almost a trillion dollars for compensation purposes.<ref>[http://www.infowars.com/the-cover-up-bps-crude-politics-and-the-looming-environmental-mega-disaster-2/ The Cover-up: BP's Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster,] Wayne Madsen, 06 May 2010. Retrieved from infowars.com 6 June 2010.</ref><ref>[http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/31/why_obama_should_put_bp_under_temporary_receiversh/ Why Obama Should Put BP Under Temporary Receivership,] [[Obama_doublespeak#Change|Robert Reich]], 31 May 2010. Retrieved from talkingpointsmemo.com, 6 June 2010.</ref>

After Obama charged [[Attorney General]] [[Eric Holder]] to investigate the disaster, BP establish a $20 billion extrajudicial fund managed by an Obama appointee.<ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37574 Obama's Latest Shakedown,] David Limbaugh, ''Human Events'', 06/20/2010.</ref> Former [[CNN]] news writer and radio talk show host Mike Malloy suggested Holder is beholden to [[corporatist]] interests.<ref>[http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100603042451.aspx The AG vs. BP: Little Skepticism on ABC and NBC, While Lefty Talker Blasts Holder as 'Corporatist' Pretender], Rich Noyes, Media Research Center, 3 June 2010.</ref>

== Criticism of the Obama administration's handling of the disaster ==
[[File:Memorial for oil workers.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Memorial service for the 11 workers killed in the explosion. ''Reuters'' [http://www.daylife.com/photo/00nya1C9URdAy?q=Mississippi] ]]
Former top adviser to President [[Bill Clinton]], [[James Carville]], turned visibly emotional in a interview with [[George Stephanopoulos]] on [[ABC]]'s ''[[Good Morning America]]'' over [[President Barack Obama]]'s "lackadaisical" response to the Gulf oil spill disaster.
{{Cquote|The political [[stupid]]ity is unbelievable. ... The President of the United States could have come down here. He could have been involved with the families of these 11 people...... He could have implemented a plan in anticipation of this... He could be commandeering tankers and making BP bring tankers in and clean this up.... He could be deploying people to the coast. He could be with the corps of engineers and the Coast Guard with these people in Plaquemines Parish, doing something about these regulations. These people are crying. They're begging for something down here. And it just looks like he's not involved in this! Man, you have got to get down here and take control of this! Put somebody in charge of this and get this thing moving! We're about to die down here!<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/bp-oil-spill-political-headache-obama-democrats-slam/story?id=10746519 'Political Stupidity': Democrat James Carville Slams Obama's Response to BP Oil Spill; Democratic Strategist Said White House Should've Acted Quickly: 'We're About to Die Down Here',] Jake Tapper and Huma Khan, ''Good Morning America,'' 26 May 2010. Retrieved from abcnews.go.com 28 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0526/unhinged-carville-obama-gulf/ Unhinged Carville goes off on Obama on oil spill, The Raw Story, May 26, 2010]</ref><ref>http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasalert/2010/20100526121155.aspx</ref>}}
Carville also said in a separate interview on [[CNN]] with [[Anderson Cooper]],
{{Cquote|They are risking everything by this ‘go along with BP’ strategy they have. They seem, like, lackadaisical on this...they seem like they’re inconvenienced by this, this is some giant thing getting in their way and somehow or another, if you let BP handle it, it’ll all go away. It’s not going away. It’s growing out there. It is a disaster of the first magnitude...the government thinks that they are partnering with BP. I think they actually believe that BP has some kind of a good motivation here. That’s one of the, sort of, whole flaws is they're naïve.<ref>[http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1005/23/sotu.01.html State of the Union with Candy Crowley,] CNN, 23 May 2010. Retrieved 20 May 2010.</ref><ref>http://www.mediaite.com/tv/james-carville-obama-administration-seems-inconvenienced-by-bp-oil-spill/</ref>}}
Obama acknowledged the criticism days later in a televised press conference:
{{Cquote|Where I was wrong was in my belief that the oil companies had their act together when it came to worst-case scenarios.<ref>Remarks by President Obama on the Gulf Oil Spill, Office of the Press Secretary, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 29 May 2010.</ref>}}
[[File:Day12 comedyskit1.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Day 12 of the Disaster: Obama enjoys an evening of levity and banter with the Washington Press Corps at the White House Correspondent's Dinner.]]
[[MSNBC]] talk show host [[Chris Matthews]]<ref>Matthews said of Obama during the Potomac Primaries, "it's part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama's speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often." [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/13/chris-matthews-i-felt-thi_n_86449.html]</ref> said on [[Jay Leno]]'s ''Tonight Show'',
{{Cquote|The president scares me. He's been acting a little like a Vatican Observer here. When is he actually going to do something? And I worry. I know he doesn't want to take ownership of it. I know politics. He said the minute he says, 'I'm in charge,' he takes the blame.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100524/pl_ynews/ynews_pl2219 White House seeks to fend off growing chorus of critics on handling of Gulf spill,] ''Yahoo News'', 24 May 2010. Retrieved 30 May 2010.</ref>}}

[[Secretary of State]] [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]'s presidential campaign manager in 2008 questioned if [[Democratic]] primary [[voter]]s had
{{Cquote|underestimated the value of experience and crisis management as important attributes for their president.<ref>[http://topics.npr.org/article/04M3gpJa4p92Z?q=NPR Did 2008 Democratic primary voters underestimate value of experience?] Alex Pappas, ''The Daily Caller'', 06/06/10. Retrieved from npr.org, 6 June 2010.</ref>}}

Donna Brazile, who managed the presidential campaign of Democratic [[candidate]] [[Al Gore]] in 2000 said on [[ABC]]'s ''[[This Week]]'',
{{Cquote|One of the problems I have with the administration is that they're not tough enough. They are waiting for BP to say, ‘oh, we've got a new plan to stop the oil leak.’ They need to stop it, contain it, clean it up, and try to help us conserve our coastal wetlands.<ref>[http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/99375-donna-brazile-calls-obamas-oil-spill-response-not-tough-enough Donna Brazile calls Obama’s oil spill response ‘not tough enough’,] Ben Geman, ''The Hill'', 23 May 2010.</ref>}}

[[Dick Morris]], an intimate adviser to President [[Bill Clinton]] observed,
{{Cquote|these failings show that Obama is in over his head. But to the [[left]], which bleeds for each drop of water in the gulf and cries over every turtle or shrimp or sea bird, it is an unpardonable sin...Obama's incompetence and inexperience is causing [[liberal]]s to see him as arrogant, aloof, removed, conceited, suspicious of outside advice and even lazy...these character defects will haunt the president until 2012 and beyond.<ref>[http://townhall.com/columnists/DickMorrisandEileenMcGann/2010/06/19/dems_turn_on_obama?page=full&comments=true Dems Turn On Obama,] Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, 19 June 2010. Retrieved from Townhall.com 19 June 2010.</ref>}}

David Gergen worked in the [[Reagan]], [[George H.W. Bush]], and Clinton White House remarked,
{{Cquote|If our government had fought [[WWII]] like the way we’re fighting the oil spill, there’s a good chance many of us would be speaking [[German]] today.<ref>[http://www.ihatethemedia.com/david-gergen-rips-obama-oil-spill-response Another Democrat turns on Obama: David Gergen rips Obama’s oil spill response, Ihatethemedia.com, May 27, 2010]</ref>}}

Republican Chairman [[Michael Steele]] criticized the president for golfing while the oil crisis worsened. <ref>[http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/08/06/cincinnati-billboard-serves-boehner-political-water-hazard?test=latestnews#ixzz0vt9Ojx4N Cincinnati Billboard Serves As Boehner Political Water Hazard, FOXNews, August 6, 2010</ref> {{cquote|Until this problem is fixed, no more golf outings.}}

[[Peggy Noonan]], a speech writer for President's Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, summed up public perceptions with,
{{Cquote|The president, in my view, continues to govern in a way that suggests he is chronically detached from the central and immediate concerns of his countrymen.... he has not, almost from the day he was inaugurated, been in sync with the [[Centrist|center]]....The American people have spent at least two years worrying that high government spending would, in the end, undo the republic. They saw the dollars gushing night and day...And now we have a videotape metaphor for all the public’s fears: the well gushing black oil into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] ...His philosophy is that it is appropriate for the federal government to occupy a more burly, significant and powerful place in America—confronting its problems of need, injustice, inequality. ... Then the oil spill came and government could not do the job, could not meet the need ...[[Hurricane Katrina|Katrina]] illustrate[d] that even though the federal government in our time has continually taken on new missions and responsibilities, the more it took on, the less it seemed capable of performing even its most essential jobs. [[Conservative]]s got this point—they know it without being told—but [[liberal]]s and [[progressive]]s did not. They thought Katrina was the result only of [[George W. Bush]]’s incompetence and conservatives’ failure to “believe in government.” But Mr. Obama was supposed to be competent....It’s not good to have a president in this position—weakened, polarizing and lacking broad public support—less than halfway through his term. That it is his fault is no comfort.<ref>[http://www.peggynoonan.com/article.php?article=524 He Was Supposed to Be Competent]: The spill is a disaster for the president and his political philosophy., Peggy Noonan, ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'', 29 May 2010.</ref>}}

''[[New York Times]]'' columnist [[Liberal_hate_speech#Against_the_disabled|Maureen Dowd]] wrote,
{{Cquote|Obama and top aides who believe in his [[divinity]] make a mistake to dismiss complaints of his aloofness as Washington white noise. He treats the press as a nuisance rather than examining his own inability to encapsulate Americans’ feelings.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/30/opinion/30dowd.html Once More, With Feeling,] Maureen Dowd, ''New York Time'' Op Ed, 29 mMay 2010.l</ref>}}

Actor Robert Redford demanded action from the [[Obama administration]]. The liberal special interest group [[Natural Resources Defense Council]] has Redford in a new ad decrying the lackluster response.<ref>[http://biggovernment.com/jmeath/2010/05/25/obamas-katrina-in-the-gulf/ Obama’s ‘Katrina’ in the Gulf, BigGovernment.com, May 25, 2010]</ref> Redford made an appearance on MSNBC and said there is no one manning this ship,
{{Cquote|In this case, we don’t need a disaster manager, we need a leader.}}

[[Hollywood values|Liberal Hollywood]] director [[James Cameron]] says;
{{cquote|Over the last few weeks I've watched, as we all have, with growing horror and heartache, watching what's happening in the Gulf and thinking those morons don't know what they're doing. <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/cameron-titanic-spill-morons/2010/06/03/id/361007 'Titanic' Director Cameron: 'Morons' Directing Spill Efforts, NewsMax, June, 2010]</ref>}}

Obnoxious Hollywood liberal [[Rosie O'Donnell]] said, "We broke the womb of freaking mother Earth." <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2010/06/08/rosie-odonnell-wants-bps-assets-seized-we-broke-freakin-womb-mother-eart Rosie O'Donnell Wants BP's Assets Seized, NewsBusters.org, June 8, 2010]</ref> In addition, O'Donnell accused BP of
{{cquote|willful homicide, willful mass murder" and demanded BP be nationalized immediately: "I say seize their assets. Right now. Seize their assets today. Take over the company.}}

===Foreign reaction===
Relations between allies the [[U.K.]] and U.S. are now at historic lows thanks to Barack Obama's mishandling of the oil spill. Britain had been repeatedly mocked by Obama prior to the spill<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/mar/06/obama-dvd-brown Obama's DVD gift to Brown - it's the thought that counts,] ''Guardian UK,'' March 6, 2009.</ref> <ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4623148/Barack-Obama-sends-bust-of-Winston-Churchill-on-its-way-back-to-Britain.html Barack Obama sends bust of Winston Churchill on its way back to Britain,] ''Telegraph UK,'' February 14, 2009.</ref> <ref>[http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/03/obama_disses_brit_pm.html Obama disses Brit PM, American Thinker,] March 5, 2009.</ref> but now find themselves subjected to endless [[propaganda]]. Prominent foreign dignitaries have expressed the public's growing frustration with the administration's posturing and hunt for scapegoats. The mayor of London, Boris Johnson, who supported Obama in 2008, decried "anti-British rhetoric, buck-passing and name-calling" while Lord Tebbit branded Mr Obama's conduct “despicable” and the president's rhetoric
{{cquote|a crude, [[bigot]]ed, [[xenophobic]] display of [[partisan]] political Presidential petulance."<ref>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1285467/BP-OIL-SPILL-Lord-Tebbit-Boris-Johnson-attack-Obamas-anti-British-rhetoric.html#ixzz0rK7zthtN</ref><ref>[http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23843524-boris-johnson-tells-barack-obama-stop-bashing-britain.do Boris Johnson tells Barack Obama: Stop bashing Britain,] London Evening Standard, June 6, 2010.</ref>}}
The atmosphere Obama created in Britain is so toxic that the British press has labelled Barack Obama the most unpopular man in England. <ref>[http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/06/17/2010-06-17_president_barack_obama_is_the_most_hated_man_in_england_says_british_reporter.html Barack Obama: the most unpopular man in Britain?,] Telegraph UK, June 17, 2010.</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|3}}

[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Disasters]]
[[Category: Environment]]

==External Links==
* [http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23oilspill Twitter Feed: #Oilspill (warning vulgar comments left)]
* [http://www.bp.com/bodycopyarticle.do?categoryId=1&contentId=7052055&nicam=USCSBaselineCrisis&nisrc=Google&nigrp=Non_Branded Official BP Global Oil Spill News Website]
* [http://dailybail.com/slideshows/bp-disaster-dying-birds/5613601 Photos of Gulf birds covered in oil]

September 11, 2001 attacks

2010-08-07T02:49:53Z

ChrisGT90: /* Conspiracy Theories */ Moved ref tags

[[Image:National Park Service 9-11 Statue of Liberty and WTC fire.jpg|right|300px|thumb|The view of the burning towers of the World Trade Center from Staten Island, New York City, September 11, 2001]]
The '''Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001''' occurred when [[al Qaeda]]-affiliated [[Islam|Islamic extremists]] hijacked four transcontinental airliners and used them to strike targets in the [[United States]], succeeded in destroying the largest portions of what had been ''The World Trade Center'', including the "Twin Towers", in New York City, and a portion of the Pentagon in Washington, D.C.; the fourth aircraft, in which the hijackers are believed to have targeted the White House or the Capital Building, crashed into an empty field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania after passengers fought back to re-take control.

The sheer audacity of the attack and the heavy loss of life that resulted from it caused the U.S. Government to declare a [[War on Terror]] with the determination to hunt down terrorists world-wide; within two months of September 11, [[Afghanistan]] was completely occupied by American forces, driving the ruling Islamo-fascist [[Taliban]] from power and causing the head of al Qaeda, who personally approved the attacks, [[Osama bin Laden]], to flee into hiding.

==The Hijacking==
All 19 hijackers boarded the planes on the morning of September 11, having carefully chosen flights whose routes would be transcontinental. Two planes flew out of Boston's Logan Airport, one flew from Washington's Dulles International Airport, and the fourth left an airport in Newark, New Jersey.

===New York City===
American Airlines Flight 11 left Logan Airport around 8 AM, carrying 11 crew and 81 passengers; its destination was Los Angeles, California. United Airlines Flight 175 left Logan a few minutes later, carrying 9 crew and 56 passengers, and also on a flight to Los Angeles. Both aircraft were the 767-200, manufactured by the Boeing Company.

At 8:25 AM Boston air traffic controllers heard a strange voice from Flight 11: "We have some planes. Just stay quiet, and you will be OK. We are returning to the airport." The plane then headed south toward New York City; at 8:46 AM the plane crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Center between the 93 and 99th floors. Sixteen minutes later, at 9:03 AM, Flight 175 crashed into the south tower - at a greater speed and more oblique angle - between the 77th and 85th floors.

The impact of the crashes took out any hope of getting to victims and survivors on the affected floors and the floors above; many people desperate to get away from the smoke and fire jumped. Both towers were designed to survive the impact of a 1960s-era jet, but the Boeing 767 was larger and carried more fuel; it was determined later that the heat from the burning fuel weakened the central steel structure and supports. At 9:59 am the south tower collasped; the upper floors had lost support in the damaged area and fell - pancake style - to the ground. At 10:29 AM the north tower fell in a similar manner. The death toll was around 2,750, including more than 300 firefighters and 100 police officers and other rescue workers.

The building at 7 World Trade Center, commonly abbreviated as WTC7, also collapsed in the attacks. This collapse is frequently cited in various [[9/11 conspiracy theories|conspiracy theories]].

===Washington, D.C.===
American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757-200, left Dulles at 8:20 AM, carrying 6 crew and 58 passengers on a flight to Los Angeles. Forty minutes later the aircraft had turned back toward Washington; at 9:37 it crashed at high-speed into the west side of the Pentagon, killing a total of 184 people. Despite being built of reinforced concrete, the aircraft was able to penetrate to the third concentric ring of the building.

===Shanksville, Pennsylvania===
[[File:ShanksvilleSept11.jpg|right|200px|thumb|Val McClatchey snapped this photo moments after Flight 93 hit the ground near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.]]
United Airlines Flight 93, a Boeing 757-200, left Newark at 8:40 AM, with a destination of San Fransisco. Unlike the other planes which had four hijackers each, Flight 93 had three; it also had passengers who, through onboard phone calls, learned of the previous hijackings and crashes and determined to wrest control of the aircraft back from the terrorists. Turned towards Washington, the plane ended up crashing in a wheat field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania at 10:03 AM, the only one of the aircraft which failed to reach its target. Among the recorded conversations between the passengers and phone operators was the phrase "Let's roll" by Todd Beamer, made just before he set down his phone and took action with the other passengers involved; Beamer's last phrase would become a rallying cry in the coming war on terorism.

===Ground Casualties===
The total loss of life is constantly being reevaluated to account for wrongly reported missing persons and, in some cases, occurrences of fraud. Estimates of more than 6,000 deaths were announced following the attacks. The current estimate is 2,996 fatalities as a direct result of the attacks. About 500 foreign nationals from over 90 countries are believed to have died in the attack.<ref> [http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast/10/29/wtc.deaths/ "New York Reduces 9/11 Death Toll by 40"] at CNN.com, Phil Hirschkorn, 10/29/03</ref>

The Department of Defense reported the deaths of 125 people at The Pentagon. The aftermath of the World Trade Center towers collapsing created a good deal of confusion and has been the main source of discrepancies in casualty estimates. As of October 29, 2003, New York City reported 2605 deaths in the attacks, not counting the passengers and crew of the planes. <ref> [http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast/10/29/wtc.deaths/ "New York Reduces 9/11 Death Toll by 40"] at CNN.com, Phil Hirschkorn, 10/29/03</ref>

As a matter of course, the deaths of the 19 [[suicide|hijackers]] are not included in these casualty totals.

===Economic Impact===
The material costs of the attacks are well in excess of one hundred billion US dollars. Factoring in stock market losses, loss of revenue in New York City, loss of jobs, impact on air travel, and heightened security, some estimate the cost approaches two trillion dollars.<ref>[http://www.iags.org/costof911.html The Cost of September 11] Institute for the Analysis of Global Security</ref>

Some estimates of the cost of executing the plan place it in the $400,000-$500,000 range, making it an extremely "profitable" operation for al-Qaeda. <ref>[http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Exec.htm The 9/11 Commission Report]</ref>

==The Suspects==
Suspicion fell on Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda organization almost immediately. Known to have harbored hatred for the United States since the basing of U.S. fighters and other military personnel in Saudi Arabia during the first Gulf War, bin Laden has tried "To kill Americans and their allies — civilians and military — is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it," <ref>[http://awildernessvoice.com/Mohammed.html]</ref>, and often succeeding. In four previous attacks, bin Laden's operatives
*killed 6 in a bomb explosion in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993;
*killed 19 soldiers in 1996 at a military housing complex in Saudi Arabia;
*killed more than 200 people in the simultaneous bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania;
*killed 17 sailors by putting an explosives-laden boat next to USS ''Cole'' while that destroyer was refueling in Yemen in 2000.

His personal fortune, estimated in the hundreds of millions of dollars, has enabled him to finance well-coordinated operations, including the training of the hijackers in close-quarter fighting, commandeering of aircraft, and ironically to bankroll their education in American flight schools.

==Social Impacts==

Following the attacks there was a strong surge of patriotism in virtually all facets of American society. The government, being aware that the most deadly attack ever on American soil could stir up animosity against the ethnic or religious group of the perpetrators, went out of its way along with the media to separate Islam from the actions taken by its more radical adherents, referring to it at multiple times as a "religion of love". While people of Middle Eastern decent and adherents of Islam were concerned at first, the overall effect of hostility towards these groups was barely noticeable. Although there were literally millions of Muslims in America out of a total population of 300 million who could have sought out reprisals, in an entire year less than 500 cases of aggression of verbal hostility were reported.

==Consequences of the Attacks on U.S. Policy==
===Domestic Policy===

The attacks were a direct or indirect cause of massive changes in United States domestic policy. Most notably, the ''Homeland Security Act of 2002'' "established a [[Department of Homeland Security]], as an executive department of the United States" <ref>[http://www.whitehouse.gov/deptofhomeland/bill/hsl-bill.pdf H.R. 5005 The Homeland Security Act]</ref>, a cabinet level position. One of the tools implemented by the Department is the [[Homeland Security Advisory System]], a color coded advisory system meant to "establish a comprehensive and effective means to disseminate information regarding the risk of terrorist acts to Federal, State, and local authorities and to the American people." <ref>[http://www.dhs.gov/xinfoshare/laws/ DHS Laws and Regulations] Department of Homeland Security</ref>

Another notable result of the attacks was the ''[[USA PATRIOT Act|USA PATRIOT Act of 2001]]'' ('''U'''niting and '''S'''trengthening '''A'''merica by '''P'''roviding '''A'''ppropriate '''T'''ools '''R'''equired to '''I'''ntercept and '''O'''bstruct '''T'''errorism). The act was written to expand the authority of law enforcement and the justice system in the pursuit of terrorism suspects.<ref>[http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.3162.ENR: ''The USA PATRIOT Act''] Library of Congress</ref>

===Foreign Policy===

In response to the attacks, the United States declared a [[War on Terror]], which comprises United States military action in [[Afghanistan]] and [[Iraq]] as well as a significant increase in intelligence gathering and a new outlook on foreign relations.

==Conspiracy Theories==

''Main article: [[9/11 conspiracy theories]]''

[[Image:393px-WTC-remnant highres.jpg|right|thumb|200px|Remains of the South Tower, September 13, 2001.]]
Many conspiracy theories have sprouted up from the events of September 11, 2001, including the "Loose Change" movies seen on YouTube.<ref>[http://www.thenation.com/doc/20061002/alterman Lying About 9/11? Easy as [[ABC]]], Eric Alterman, ''The Nation'', September 14, 2006 (October 2, 2006 issue).</ref> These movies have been comprehensively disproven by independent experts.<ref>[http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html "Debunking The 9/11 Myths"] ''Popular Mechanics'', Mar. 2005 Cover Story</ref> Prominent endorsers of such theories include talk show host [[Rosie O'Donnell]] as well as actor [[Charlie Sheen]]. A third of the American public has bought into the idea of some sort of role by federal officials. {{fact}} This view is much more common among those who get their news solely from the internet and is rare for those who read newspapers or watch the news on regular television. {{fact}}

==Sources==
*[http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf The 9/11 Commission Report]
*[http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1CollapseofTowers.pdf Final Report on the Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers], [[National Institute of Standards and Technology|NIST]].
*[http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/chronology.attack/index.html September 11: Chronology of Terror] at CNN.com
*[http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/penttbom/penttbomb.htm Federal Bureau of Investigations PENTTBOM Press Release]
*[http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/main.html Lists of Victims] at CNN.com

==Additional Information==
*[http://www.archive.org/details/sept_11_tv_archive The Internet Archive's file of ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, FOX, and BBC broadcasts for Sept 11-13, 2001]
*[http://www.televisionarchive.org/ Television Archive of news broadcasts for 9/11]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

{{Terrorism}}
[[category:United States History]]
[[Category:Riots and terrorist incidents in the United States]]
[[Category:Afghanistan War]]
[[Category:Reagan Era]]

Talk:Essay:Best New Conservative Words

2010-08-07T02:41:28Z

ChrisGT90: /* 33 million sites turn up in a Google search for "anti-Christian" - Wrong! */

'''[[/archive1 | Archive 1 ]]''' 
'''[[/archive2|Archive 2 ]]'''
----

==Mother Nature==
In the New Liberal Terms section, I put the term Mother Nature in the list. Is it right?--[[User:Willminator|Willminator]] 18:40, 22 April 2010 (EDT)

I won't argue whether or not Mother nature is a liberal term on the grounds that I think the distinction between conservative and liberal words is dubious at best, however it is most certainly not a new word. The idea of mother nature is as old as the ancient greeks or older. --[[User:BenjaminS|Ben]] [[User Talk:BenjaminS|Talk]] 18:46, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

:That's a clever way to dispose of a vexing question.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:56, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

Well I don't want to waste your time by arguing the point Mr. Schlafly. If you want to put the term back in feel free. --[[User:BenjaminS|Ben]] [[User Talk:BenjaminS|Talk]] 19:24, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

How is it dubious? Also, I haven’t heard of any writings or speeches where the term Mother Nature was used hundreds of years ago. Show me at least one speech or writing where the term was used. Liberals use it to discredit Father God’s role in creation. They think that it was nature, not God, who made us. To Liberals, nature is their goddess. Funny how Wikipedia’s article on Mother Nature denies the atheistic, evolutionary and environmental implications of the term.--[[User:Willminator|Willminator]] 19:55, 22 April 2010 (EDT)

:Look up "Gaia" or "Terra Mater" - "Mother Nature" or "Mother Earth" has been around thousands of years. [[User:PaulBurnett|PaulBurnett]] 22:23, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

::The idea of personifying all of nature as a woman surely predates the liberalism of 20th century and early 21st century America. But the way in which the natural world came into existence, specifically the planet Earth which supports all life known to exist, is unknown to science: speculation is not "science" unless expressed as a theory to which a counterexample could conceivably be found (see [[falsifiability]]).

::Those scientists who deny God's role in [[Creation]] are committing the same intellectual offense they accuse [[intelligent design]] theorists of. It is also not "science" to comment on metaphysical ideas, unless we grant that the scientific method can be applied to matters beyond [[physical science]].

::The trick which liberals are playing with their anti-conservative words is to pretend that they are talking about one thing, while they are actually talking about another. This is literally the oldest trick in [[Bible|the book]]; recall that the serpent tempting Eve told her, "You will not die" yet Jesus explained later on many occasions that "life" and "death" correspond to being able or unable to love God. So eating the forbidden fruit did indeed cause Eve's death. (See verses like, "You have the name of being alive, but you are dead" in Revelations and, "Let the dead bury their own dead" in Luke 9)

::We need precise definitions of words, to prevent being tricked and fooled by deceivers with a hidden agenda. The so-called "[[peace movement]]", for example, never wanted [[peace]] but simply the victory of America's anti-[[democracy|democratic]] enemies. The "save the earth" movement is not at all concerned with preserving the environment for the well-being of human beings: it's an excuse to increase centralized control over resources, in a way which will destroy prosperity, hurting the world's poor more than any one else.

::Now it's a matter of personal belief for me that God has a feminine aspect; my church specifically teaches that the [[Holy Spirit]] is feminine, and that God is a being whose harmonized masculinity and femininity are reflected in men and women (see Gen. 1:27) but I won't preach here. The issue is the relationship between Nature and human beings.

::Liberals claim that science has proved [[Evolution]] without providing any evidence for it, let alone discussing a means by which the theory might be falsified (thus providing a highly prominent example of [[pseudoscience]]). Then they misuse this idea to hint that science has also discovered the source of the physical world ([[Big Bang]] theory) and the [[origin of life]]. Of course, when pressed, they must concede that the Theory of Evolution does not tell us how life came into being. But high school biology textbooks write about life as if it simply "evolved" from inorganic chemicals. This, by the way, is a great example of how New Liberal Words are misused to trick people. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 07:10, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

:::That's a fascinating analysis, Ed. Thank you for sharing it. I appreciate the suggestion that the [[Holy Spirit]] is feminine. Usually groups of people, like nations or large audiences, are considered to be more feminine than masculine in nature.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:13, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

== "Bully pulpit" ==

How about "bully pulpit"? When Teddy Roosevelt coined this, "bully" meant something like "excellent" rather than overbearing.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:47, 22 May 2010 (EDT)

I guess it's kind of like the word gay. At first gay meant happy and now it means something else.--[[User:Willminator|Willminator]] 19:55, 22 April 2010 (EDT)

==Definition==

I think this article needs a clear definition of what is meant by "conservative words." As I was reading it, I found it unclear as to whether it's about words invented by Conservatives or words representing Conservative values. I gather it's the latter, but I had to look in the talk page to find that. Either way, the introduction to the article isn't very clear and I'm reluctant to write a definition since I'm not sure I'm on the same page as the contributors. Would someone care to do that? [[User:EMorris|EMorris]] 13:49, 2 June 2010 (EDT)

== 33 million sites turn up in a Google search for "anti-Christian" - Wrong! ==

For the term "anti-Christian" the article claims "thirty-three million sites turn up in a Google search."

Where did this number come from? Go to Google and type in "anti-Christian" (in quotes) and you get 945,000 hits. Type in "anti-Christian" (NOT in quotes - which is totally sloppy Googling) and you get 7,590,000 hits. Where did the "thirty-three million" come from? [[User:PaulBurnett|PaulBurnett]] 22:11, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

: That's an interesting observation, Paul. The number of Google links retrieved for the search "anti-Christian" has fallen substantially. That begs the question of why.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:18, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

::Should we correct that number in the article? [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 22:41, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

== Adding Obama Portmanteaus ==

I've noticed the list does not have any of the Obama portmanteaus, like [[Obamanation]], [[Obamunism]], etc. Shouldn't these terms be added? They are great for described the unfortunate turn this country is taking. [[User:JonS|JonS]] 17:13, 27 June 2010 (EDT)

== Underdog ==

Conservative term imho. Seeker of greatness against the odds. Cinderella story. David (underdog) slays Goliath. The meek (underdog) shall inherit the Earth. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 03:09, 10 July 2010 (EDT)

: I agree that "underdog" is a conservative term, and I will promote it now. Thanks for mentioning this.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 08:42, 10 July 2010 (EDT)

== Excellent scholarship ==

In the face of such well founded scholarship, Liberals will never manage to disprove the remarkable growth pattern illustrating the doubling per century of Conservative words. Nevertheless, perhaps the essay could be improved slightly by adding that Conservative words are words that express a Conservative concept or words that are used significantly more often by conservatives than Liberals. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 17:20, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

: Not sure what confusion you're trying to clear up here. Conservatives words express insights that are conservative. These words are freely available to liberals and conservatives alike, though liberals may indeed irrationally try (in a fool's errand) to avoid using them.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:34, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

::The essay begins by mentioning Conservative terms, then a list of Conservative words and terms follows, nowhere in the essay is it made clear what Conservative words or terms actually are. That, I think, should occur at the beginning of the essay. Supplying a definition of what a Conservative term is, will underpin the observation that the data supplied irrefutably proves a "1-2-4-8" geometric increase for new conservative terms. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 14:51, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

:::Definition by example seems best here. Other proposed definitions are, of course, welcome.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:35, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

::Other definitions are not required, your own excellent, clear and concise definition that Conservatives words express [[conservative insights]] is more than adequate. However, [[definition]] by [[example]] begs the question, are the words in the list because they are Conservative or are the words Conservative because they are in the list? [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 15:48, 31 July 2010 (EDT)

:::The terms are obviously Conservative independent of being in this list. You wouldn't request a definition for "List of Words beginning with G", so why are you demanding a definition for "Conservative term"? Are the component words of the phrase that obtuse for you? We're not using them in any aberrant way. --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 18:04, 31 July 2010 (EDT)

::::Nowhere did I demand a definition, I merely suggested that providing one would underpin the excellent scholarship presented in the essay. G is a well established concept amongst literate people. "List of Words beginning with G" is a definition, therefore it logically does not require a definition. The term 'Conservative words' is not as well established as G, therefore a definition helps those unfamiliar with the term understand it and benefit from Mr Schlafly's excellent insights. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 16:57, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

:::::What you say cannot be true, because in the world I live in, people know and understand what "conservative" means, and they don't need it spelled out for them. Talking about the "excellent scholarship presented in this essay" smacks of sarcasm from the tone of the rest of your post. If you were a ''real'' conservative, you wouldn't have to be asking what a "conservative word" was. --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 21:29, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

::My suggestion to elaborate was in order to elucidate the term 'Conservative words' not the word 'Conservative'. The elucidation is intended for visitors unfamiliar with the term, not for myself. Many come to Conservapedia seeking an alternative to the atheistic anti-Christian misinformation, gossip and pornography prevalent elsewhere on the internet. Elucidation enables such people to better understand and appreciate what Conservapedia has to offer, and may facillitate bringing them into the fold, so that they may also profit from the many [[Essay:Conservative Benefits|Conservative benefits]]. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 18:01, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

:::If liberals are so devoid of intelligence or honesty to clearly understand the simple application of an adjective to a noun, then why should we dumb down our article just for their pea-sized brains? --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 21:57, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

"AmandaBunting" (if that really is your name), I've reviewed your contributions and you're not doing much more than talk, talk talk. We conservatives favor substantive contributions to this project, so if all you can do is complain on talk pages, Wikipedia might be a better place for you and your misguided ideology. It's obvious you're not here to help anyone learn. [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 18:18, 31 July 2010 (EDT)

:I am neither complaining nor have I a misguided ideology. I am simply making substantive suggestions about how I think this excellent essay may be improved. As a Conservative I would have expected more [[Chivalry|chivalrous]] behaviour here, there is [[Essay:Rules of Chivalry for Students|much you can learn]] from Conservapedia. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 16:57, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

::But you didn't suggest a definition, even though one would have been (and still is) welcome from you. Wikis are not answer boxes; they are places where people contribute ideas and ''substantive'' edits, and then others improve them.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:34, 4 August 2010 (EDT)

:::I had already mentioned that other definitions are not required because you had already supplied supplied an excellent, clear and concise definition that Conservatives words express Conservative insights. I have added that to the essay, furthermore the definition itself links to the insightful article [[Conservative insights]]. [[User:AmandaBunting|AmandaBunting]] 17:38, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

== Maggie Thatcher ==

Great article. How about some of Margaret Thatcher's great new conservative terms:
* U-turn: What liberal politicians do all the time
* There is no alternative: Liberals pretend that they have an alternative to conservative values
* Oxygen of publicity: What liberals want to give to terrorists
* Fight to win: What conservatives should do!
[[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 19:03, 14 July 2010 (EDT)
:Get this! Adding those four terms takes the total for the 20th century to 160 - we're getting very close to a perfect geometric progression. [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 19:07, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

:: Thanks for the suggestions, but I'm not sure the above terms meet the high quality level of the entries. Perhaps because "Maggie" was actually not very conservative by American standards? She seemed fine with nationalized health care, for example.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:29, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

== Possibility ==

''quack'', coined 1638, to refer to charlatans deceiving others with pseudoscience. Used extensively today to describe the favorite "medicines" of new-age liberals. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 20:40, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

: Interesting and informative suggestion. However, the term strikes me as name-calling rather than insightful. I'm not sure its use would be consistent with our rules!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:26, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

== Kiss of Death ==

The term "Kiss of Death" clearly originated earlier than 1943, as the article would suggest, as there was [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiss_of_Death_%281916_film%29 a 1916 film by that name]. In fact, I'm not convinced this was the origin of the term, which has probably been in use since Judas' betrayal. [[User:DanieleGiusto|DanieleGiusto]] 22:01, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

: Your link to Wikipedia is broken, and the movie was probably a literal rather than figurative use of the word. Merriam-Webster gives a date of 1943.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:24, 15 July 2010 (EDT)

::Fixed the link; thanks for the heads-up. [[User:DanieleGiusto|DanieleGiusto]] 13:38, 16 July 2010 (EDT)
-

== Possibility for 1800's: Carpetbagger ==

While the term originally related specifically to northern politicians interjecting themselves into the politics of the Reconstruction-era south, it has since come to be used for political opportunists in a more general sense. Since this sort of behavior is common among Democrats (Hillary Clinton, anyone?) I'd argue that the term has value as a conservative word. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 12:52, 19 July 2010 (EDT)

: "Carpetbagger" is a fascinating suggestion. [[Hillary Clinton]] and [[Robert F. Kennedy]] were modern senatorial examples. Perhaps there are other modern examples also.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:45, 19 July 2010 (EDT)

:::Well...hmm. There's John Garamendi, the former lieutenant governor of California, who ran for election to the House in a district where he didn't live. His defense, as I recall, was "Well, I don't live there, but my front yard's in the district." (It wasn't.) --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 17:26, 19 July 2010 (EDT)

== Research method ==

I just wanted to point out that actively looking for words to fit the geometric rate of growth, from a scientific point of view, is a biased method of research. You will ALWAYS find words in a 1-2-4-8 geometric growth rate, if that's what you actively look for. A more neutral research method would be to ***randomly*** (I can't stress it enough, it MUST be random) pick up, say, 1000 words created after 1600, and see if they match that growth rate.

This method CAN lead to a scientific result, mind you, but only after ALL words created after 1600 have been taken into account, whether they match the growth rate or not. Feel free to refute my reasoning if I made a logical flaw in it, and if you think that actively choosing words to fit a 1-2-4-8 growth rate has scientific validity, please explain me why I am wrong. Thank you! --[[User:MarcoT2|MarcoT2]] 11:35, 20 July 2010 (EDT)

== Suggestion? ==

What does everyone else think about ''militant atheist''? I had to listen to someone rail at me for being a Christian on the train this morning '''for an hour''' and it got me thinking. I've been hearing the term since I was a kid, but that would probably fall into the 20th century. William Ayers anyone? My argument in favor is that most of them try to pass themselves off as peaceful, tolerant, etc, when (only my opinion here) that isn't really the case. We should call it as we see it here. I can't provide a year, but maybe someone with more experience can? What do you think? [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 13:23, 20 July 2010 (EDT)

== Selection Bias and Proposal for an Unbiased Test ==

===Selection bias===
The easiest way to see this is the history of your finds: You have repeatedly achieved what you call a perfect layer (1-2-4-8) of new conservative words, i.e. 1 word of the 17th century, 2 of the 18th century, 4 of the 19th century and 8 of the 20th century.

What's the probability to get a perfect layer? Here are the probabilities for the century of origin of a random conservative words, assuming that your insight is correct: 

<table><tr><th>Century</th><th>Probability</th></tr><tr><td>17th</td><td>1/15</td></tr><tr><td>18th</td><td>2/15</td></tr><tr><td>19th</td><td>4/15</td></tr><tr><td>20th</td><td>8/15</td></tr></table>

For a layer, we have to take 15 words. It's easy to calculate the probability that these 15 words form a perfect layer:

15!/(8!×4!×2!×1!) × (1/15)1 × (2/15)2 × (4/15)4 × (8/15)8 = 675675 × 234 / 1515 =0.0265

2.65% is the probability to chose 15 words and get a perfect layer instead of 2-1-4-8 or 1-2-5-7... And how often was this remarkable deed performed?

That you were able to repeat this process for a couple of times shows that you were actively (though not necessarily consciously) looking for words to match your pattern, i.e., you showed a selection bias - a kind of affirmative action for newer words...

: Selection bias exists in any study. The issue is not whether there is selection bias (there always is), but whether the selection bias is so great that it disqualifies the results. Unless there were a strong underlying pattern of increase by century, it would be almost impossible even with high selection bias to attain the resulting pattern of doubling by century.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:51, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

::*''Selection bias exists in any study. '' But most scientists try to avoid it (even in the social sciences), and try to monitor its effect. They most certainly should not embrace it as a way to make their point (that is, they are called on it when they do so...)
::*''Unless there were a strong underlying pattern of increase by century, it would be almost impossible even with high selection bias to attain the resulting pattern of doubling by century.'' But [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law|Conservapedia's Law]] doesn't claim that ''their is a increase by century''. No, it explicitly states that ''conservative insights increase over time at a geometric rate, as in 1-2-4-8-16-etc. For example, there is a doubling in effective new conservative terms per century.'' While their may an increase over the centuries, the rate of this increase (doubling, i.e. an increase by 100% by century) is an artefact of the way you perform your search: That is, even if the real rate is 70% , 130% - or 83% (the [[maximum likelihood estimator]] for your current set of words taken into account the year of their creation), you end up with a perfect fit of 100% - unless you have enumerated ''all'' conservative words at least for one century.
::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:44, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

===An unbiased test===
Andy, f you are interested in testing your insight, I really would like to help you. The hidden table below contains 500 words which - according to the Merriam-Webster - originated between 1600 and 2000. The list was generated by taking words of the ubuntu-dictionary at random and checking their age automatically via the site of Merriam-Webster. This was repeated until 500 feasible words were found. 

If you mark each conservative word with an "r" (and perhaps each liberal word with an "l"), we'll get an estimate of the percentage of conservative words - and a fairly unbiased distribution over the time.

Please be aware that the distribution of this sample doesn't follow a geometric law. Here are the number of words by century of origin:
<table><tr><th>Century</th><th>Number of Words</th></tr><tr><td>17th</td><td>151</td></tr><tr><td>18th</td><td>84</td></tr><tr><td>19th</td><td>161</td></tr><tr><td>20th</td><td>104</td></tr></table>

: Your proposed test is an interesting one, and I do see far more conservative words from the 1700s than the 1600s. Indeed, I'm pleasantly surprised how many conservative words show up in your random selection, as I never claimed that conservative (or liberal) words were a substantial percentage of all new words generated.

:That said, the defect in your proposed test is the weakness in dictionaries publishing more recent new conservative words from, say, the 1900s. Dictionaries are good at defining old words, but not-so-good at recognizing and defining relatively new concepts. That's what we need Conservapedia for! :-).--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:07, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

::*''That said, the defect in your proposed test is the weakness in dictionaries publishing more recent new conservative words from, say, the 1900s. '' That's hardly a fatal flaw which would render the test useless. But we can even circumvent it: Let's just concentrate on the period 1600-1899! As you acknowledge that ''dictionaries are good at defining old words'', in the next list you will find 500 words from these three centuries. I assume that [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law|Conservapedia's Law]] should hold not only for the 20th and the 21st century. (the list is a wikitable with two columns, just add a marker for a conservative word in the second column. I omitted the years of the creation of the words (all taken from the Merriam-Webster) and I would advice you against checking the age before marking a word - though of course the age of quite a few words is apparent)
::*A dictionary is the obvious choice when talking about the number of words. But you are absolutely right that dictionaries are biased towards older words. I assume that the percentage of words in general use which were created in the 20th century is much higher than those of the 17th century! When one is interested only in the distribution of conservative words , one could sample over Conservapedia's articles, and try various methods to get the age of the newest words used. But this is of course more cumbersome than just looking into a dictionary, so I'll postpone it for a while.
::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:47, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

===Table of random words===
{|class="collapsible collapsed"
!500 words
|-
|1 economics
2 storeroom
3 hunkers
4 sufficing
5 coffeehouses
6 stalagmites
7 therapy
8 sanitation
9 cheapskates
10 Caesareans
11 ringmaster
12 acclimate
13 penology
14 verandah
15 caregivers
16 fed
17 disengaged
18 whitecaps
19 dissertation
20 consignment
21 chainsaws
22 speeds
23 kinfolk
24 caribous
25 hobbyists
26 coefficients
27 protuberance
28 morphemes
29 Caroline
30 millionaires
31 recyclable
32 wilts
33 unreconstructed
34 chandeliers
35 palomino
36 joysticks
37 volleys
38 cajoling
39 bucksaws
40 spars
41 portaged
42 acoustically
43 humanize
44 hybridize
45 tipsters
46 overprices
47 marksmanship
48 fezes
49 depressant
50 auctioned
51 flamethrower
52 biking
53 artistic
54 agribusiness
55 jottings
56 pedicures
57 Cordilleras
58 slots
59 recording
60 unrealistic
61 rationalism
62 peacekeeping
63 aromatherapy
64 jackknife
65 champagne
66 horrendous
67 Quasimodo
68 excavator
69 chowders
70 arts
71 configure
72 civic
73 telegraphy
74 sweepstakes
75 euphoric
76 strategy
77 subgroup
78 shouting
79 gusher
80 telemarketing
81 glucose
82 booties
83 preponderated
84 manures
85 outspokenness
86 wiener
87 embeds
88 amped
89 sternums
90 empathy
91 cognomina
92 colitis
93 kimono
94 retched
95 singletons
96 megaphoned
97 respelled
98 Hindus
99 squiggle
100 irrigates
101 reconstructions
102 deceptiveness
103 colonialism
104 missioned
105 dyes
106 maladroit
107 tents
108 turfs
109 generalization
110 seamanship
111 duffers
112 scruffier
113 pollinate
114 bobcats
115 achieved
116 exerted
117 flapjack
118 Independence
119 lucidity
120 indenturing
121 enumerable
122 disenchanted
123 flashback
124 trilogies
125 colloquially
126 Colby
127 killjoys
128 lifelines
129 hydrotherapy
130 psychoanalysis
131 memorializing
132 bronchitis
133 rink
134 automobiles
135 dandy
136 schoolmarms
137 debriefing
138 glands
139 oceanography
140 jetted
141 hurdler
142 dependability
143 tactician
144 rotor
145 liturgies
146 quantified
147 wests
148 quitters
149 ocarinas
150 betting
151 apathetically
152 smoggier
153 Xenia
154 saris
155 dupe
156 voodooism
157 optimize
158 particularization
159 funereally
160 masterminding
161 capsizes
162 orchestrates
163 uncivilized
164 emphasized
165 skyrocket
166 plagiarist
167 politicoes
168 streptococci
169 pantsuits
170 waving
171 decontaminates
172 teensy
173 taxonomy
174 proselytizes
175 drollness
176 expectoration
177 legmen
178 modulations
179 diploma
180 Brandy
181 radar
182 pushiest
183 drill
184 lush
185 temperas
186 musicals
187 wheal
188 horticulture
189 cancan
190 jocularity
191 caramels
192 bipolar
193 sophisticated
194 injudicious
195 emulsion
196 ignore
197 cannonballed
198 swastika
199 overachievers
200 rubella
201 chuckhole
202 ersatz
203 breeziness
204 climaxes
205 explosiveness
206 empathizing
207 jumps
208 secularizing
209 sequoia
210 bibliography
211 prettying
212 bouldered
213 authorship
214 vocalizing
215 tarpons
216 camisoles
217 cowpox
218 tans
219 breathable
220 machines
221 tycoon
222 flicking
223 squishes
224 semiprofessional
225 feline
226 seedling
227 hankie
228 entitlement
229 abscissa
230 derisive
231 romance
232 overprice
233 beads
234 stipple
235 Kitty
236 jewelled
237 mascaraed
238 dissociation
239 moments
240 Spica
241 quaking
242 legislation
243 wobbly
244 scorches
245 books
246 gastrointestinal
247 finked
248 renegotiates
249 flautists
250 wrongheadedness
251 allergenic
252 squishiest
253 kickoffs
254 mecca
255 disses
256 woodwinds
257 discotheques
258 replacements
259 tomahawks
260 voluptuaries
261 salon
262 eliciting
263 resale
264 soporific
265 dosage
266 smokestacks
267 rationalists
268 subsumed
269 futzes
270 minutemen
271 stingrays
272 marathoner
273 vagina
274 propellers
275 rooftops
276 sensationalist
277 bluejackets
278 individualize
279 hyphenating
280 Xanthippe
281 federated
282 amortize
283 airfare
284 hyphenates
285 syncopates
286 sermonizing
287 biochemistry
288 babysat
289 yellows
290 riskier
291 cassocks
292 stated
293 Cordoba
294 Slinky
295 eventfully
296 nines
297 blabbermouths
298 fraternizes
299 bucked
300 Boolean
301 bivalve
302 ricochetted
303 toys
304 toted
305 commissars
306 cushioning
307 redeploy
308 poignancy
309 variegating
310 snuffbox
311 stoplight
312 biochemists
313 bicycling
314 disenfranchised
315 nosing
316 enlightenment
317 knockout
318 resurgent
319 pediments
320 skyscrapers
321 treatments
322 polio
323 flashbulbs
324 empower
325 rounding
326 pervasive
327 humped
328 oxymora
329 freebie
330 passageway
331 barfing
332 motorists
333 triglycerides
334 Mayans
335 stopped
336 kidnapper
337 pensioning
338 foreclosures
339 Yankees
340 manifestoing
341 predictor
342 Delawares
343 librettos
344 panoply
345 angstroms
346 jodhpurs
347 backpedal
348 sugars
349 preclude
350 unravelling
351 Lilliput
352 motivator
353 enslavement
354 pencilling
355 flukey
356 amoral
357 depository
358 unemotional
359 stumpy
360 cartons
361 gal
362 ignitions
363 malingered
364 spotlighted
365 photographic
366 abnegated
367 dashing
368 atrocious
369 inanities
370 derricks
371 mountaineer
372 inseminate
373 sacrosanct
374 modernize
375 specializations
376 obliging
377 heckles
378 baccalaureates
379 bluebirds
380 lengthiest
381 octets
382 physiotherapist
383 disorganizing
384 toffees
385 unfurling
386 abnegate
387 bathrobe
388 socked
389 crepe
390 polkas
391 overwriting
392 punned
393 platoons
394 infrared
395 ensuring
396 decimate
397 baggiest
398 plungers
399 trampolining
400 centigram
401 Topsy
402 epochal
403 boogies
404 showrooms
405 pianofortes
406 Orphic
407 logbooks
408 amphibious
409 rapprochements
410 terms
411 Kalmyk
412 petering
413 geocentric
414 stills
415 ethnologist
416 exec
417 flairs
418 likableness
419 rods
420 melange
421 graduated
422 ante
423 voluminously
424 impaled
425 cognacs
426 yups
427 comfiest
428 strychnine
429 subsoiled
430 conics
431 Salish
432 windsocks
433 rutabaga
434 vacuumed
435 maestri
436 podiatrist
437 restructured
438 metrically
439 motorcade
440 zipping
441 unmoral
442 electioneered
443 minibikes
444 trillion
445 sudsier
446 actuator
447 acing
448 masochism
449 softeners
450 cocksucker
451 brig
452 verbs
453 buccaneer
454 confessed
455 filibustered
456 rearmed
457 melodramatics
458 swivelled
459 veggies
460 monochrome
461 hellos
462 escalators
463 Seyfert
464 bushwhack
465 encapsulation
466 combining
467 realists
468 playgrounds
469 teenage
470 glandular
471 tot
472 cyclical
473 tinsmith
474 commitment
475 undersells
476 orthopaedics
477 yardstick
478 Vivian
479 peppy
480 swatted
481 earlobes
482 snapshots
483 nitpicker
484 unities
485 depressants
486 briefing
487 halo
488 watermarking
489 electronics
490 inadequates
491 ghosted
492 rapscallions
493 snorkeler
494 percentages
495 relapsing
496 facet
497 inconsistently
498 takeout
499 acidify
500 password
|}
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:15, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

'''Second table: 500 random words 1600-1899'''
{|class="wikitable sortable collapsible collapsed"
!word
!date
!class
|-
|monsignor||align="right"|1607||C
|-
|productive||align="right"|1612||C
|-
|alertly||align="right"|1618||C
|-
|inconsistent||align="right"|1620||C
|-
|numerical||align="right"|1628||C
|-
|interlock||align="right"|1632||C
|-
|platoons||align="right"|1637||C
|-
|forevermore||align="right"|1641||C
|-
|identification||align="right"|1644||C
|-
|untenable||align="right"|1647||C
|-
|reversible||align="right"|1648||C
|-
|authentication||align="right"|1652||C
|-
|monotheistic||align="right"|1660||C
|-
|constructive||align="right"|1680||C
|-
|alphabetize||align="right"|1691||C
|-
|misconduct||align="right"|1705||C
|-
|propagandists||align="right"|1718||C
|-
|revelations||align="right"|1729||C
|-
|guaranteed||align="right"|1731||C
|-
|cohesiveness||align="right"|1731||C
|-
|systematizing||align="right"|1767||C
|-
|letdown||align="right"|1768||C
|-
|dissident||align="right"|1769||C
|-
|diagramming||align="right"|1785||C
|-
|backhanded||align="right"|1800||C
|-
|autocratically||align="right"|1823||C
|-
|socialistic||align="right"|1827||C
|-
|Mormonisms||align="right"|1830||C
|-
|westernize||align="right"|1837||C
|-
|trademarks||align="right"|1838||C
|-
|propagandized||align="right"|1844||C
|-
|graffito||align="right"|1851||C
|-
|Americans||align="right"|1855||C
|-
|optimize||align="right"|1857||C
|-
|outdistancing||align="right"|1857||C
|-
|rogues||align="right"|1859||C
|-
|birthrates||align="right"|1859||C
|-
|slob||align="right"|1861||C
|-
|quantifier||align="right"|1876||C
|-
|implode||align="right"|1881||C
|-
|housemother||align="right"|1882||C
|-
|scantier||align="right"|1600||
|-
|sierras||align="right"|1600||
|-
|arena||align="right"|1600||
|-
|toddled||align="right"|1600||
|-
|eventful||align="right"|1600||
|-
|catheter||align="right"|1601||
|-
|primarily||align="right"|1601||
|-
|labeling||align="right"|1601||
|-
|copings||align="right"|1601||
|-
|Pooh||align="right"|1602||
|-
|respectively||align="right"|1602||
|-
|embroiling||align="right"|1603||
|-
|haloes||align="right"|1603||
|-
|Iliad||align="right"|1603||
|-
|enthusiasm||align="right"|1603||
|-
|dragoons||align="right"|1604||
|-
|promised||align="right"|1604||
|-
|recollecting||align="right"|1604||
|-
|stentorian||align="right"|1605||
|-
|rivaling||align="right"|1605||
|-
|impregnates||align="right"|1605||
|-
|touchy||align="right"|1605||
|-
|impassive||align="right"|1605||
|-
|immediacy||align="right"|1605||
|-
|literary||align="right"|1605||
|-
|animosities||align="right"|1605||
|-
|volatile||align="right"|1605||
|-
|vegetates||align="right"|1605||
|-
|acclaiming||align="right"|1606||
|-
|onlooker||align="right"|1606||
|-
|sides||align="right"|1606||
|-
|wisher||align="right"|1607||
|-
|melancholia||align="right"|1607||
|-
|tab||align="right"|1607||
|-
|typical||align="right"|1609||
|-
|casuist||align="right"|1609||
|-
|bucolic||align="right"|1609||
|-
|footfalls||align="right"|1610||
|-
|bison||align="right"|1611||
|-
|lambing||align="right"|1611||
|-
|ticketed||align="right"|1611||
|-
|incompatibilities||align="right"|1611||
|-
|demonstrators||align="right"|1611||
|-
|reproduces||align="right"|1611||
|-
|longish||align="right"|1611||
|-
|amalgamations||align="right"|1612||
|-
|bailing||align="right"|1613||
|-
|caste||align="right"|1613||
|-
|convulses||align="right"|1614||
|-
|abscess||align="right"|1615||
|-
|valise||align="right"|1615||
|-
|cult||align="right"|1617||
|-
|hesitancy||align="right"|1617||
|-
|drill||align="right"|1619||
|-
|blotchy||align="right"|1619||
|-
|urban||align="right"|1619||
|-
|appositeness||align="right"|1621||
|-
|ingratiated||align="right"|1621||
|-
|ingrate||align="right"|1622||
|-
|diplomata||align="right"|1622||
|-
|exporters||align="right"|1623||
|-
|drolly||align="right"|1623||
|-
|adrift||align="right"|1624||
|-
|powwow||align="right"|1624||
|-
|oaf||align="right"|1625||
|-
|preconceptions||align="right"|1625||
|-
|ruse||align="right"|1625||
|-
|abominating||align="right"|1628||
|-
|dodo||align="right"|1628||
|-
|discriminated||align="right"|1628||
|-
|biassing||align="right"|1628||
|-
|enslaved||align="right"|1628||
|-
|backwaters||align="right"|1629||
|-
|palindromic||align="right"|1629||
|-
|palindromes||align="right"|1629||
|-
|tussles||align="right"|1629||
|-
|correspondents||align="right"|1630||
|-
|underrates||align="right"|1632||
|-
|underrate||align="right"|1632||
|-
|characterized||align="right"|1633||
|-
|etcher||align="right"|1634||
|-
|labium||align="right"|1634||
|-
|fluctuates||align="right"|1634||
|-
|morocco||align="right"|1634||
|-
|circumnavigated||align="right"|1634||
|-
|Anglican||align="right"|1635||
|-
|graphically||align="right"|1637||
|-
|millenniums||align="right"|1638||
|-
|domesticating||align="right"|1639||
|-
|pharmaceutical||align="right"|1640||
|-
|onus||align="right"|1640||
|-
|feints||align="right"|1644||
|-
|scavenge||align="right"|1644||
|-
|malls||align="right"|1644||
|-
|salaciously||align="right"|1645||
|-
|additional||align="right"|1646||
|-
|nonuser||align="right"|1646||
|-
|predisposing||align="right"|1646||
|-
|temperamentally||align="right"|1646||
|-
|invigorate||align="right"|1646||
|-
|protuberances||align="right"|1646||
|-
|disinclines||align="right"|1647||
|-
|castanet||align="right"|1647||
|-
|piloting||align="right"|1649||
|-
|leniently||align="right"|1652||
|-
|melange||align="right"|1653||
|-
|dialling||align="right"|1653||
|-
|naively||align="right"|1654||
|-
|siesta||align="right"|1655||
|-
|collectives||align="right"|1655||
|-
|quibbles||align="right"|1656||
|-
|dawdler||align="right"|1656||
|-
|cosmologies||align="right"|1656||
|-
|cosmology||align="right"|1656||
|-
|morbid||align="right"|1656||
|-
|inconvenienced||align="right"|1656||
|-
|numerating||align="right"|1657||
|-
|incapacitate||align="right"|1657||
|-
|overwrite||align="right"|1658||
|-
|horrendous||align="right"|1659||
|-
|tableau||align="right"|1660||
|-
|derisively||align="right"|1662||
|-
|disk||align="right"|1664||
|-
|diverging||align="right"|1665||
|-
|rotundity||align="right"|1665||
|-
|cultivators||align="right"|1665||
|-
|maroon||align="right"|1666||
|-
|stunning||align="right"|1667||
|-
|interleave||align="right"|1668||
|-
|globes||align="right"|1668||
|-
|hick||align="right"|1669||
|-
|realty||align="right"|1670||
|-
|belated||align="right"|1670||
|-
|punning||align="right"|1670||
|-
|haphazardly||align="right"|1671||
|-
|wader||align="right"|1673||
|-
|resilient||align="right"|1674||
|-
|auk||align="right"|1674||
|-
|priggish||align="right"|1676||
|-
|bungalow||align="right"|1676||
|-
|masqueraded||align="right"|1677||
|-
|configuring||align="right"|1677||
|-
|masterstroke||align="right"|1679||
|-
|yaws||align="right"|1679||
|-
|ganglions||align="right"|1681||
|-
|kidnaps||align="right"|1682||
|-
|shivery||align="right"|1683||
|-
|whaler||align="right"|1684||
|-
|bewilder||align="right"|1684||
|-
|roughshod||align="right"|1688||
|-
|bluebird||align="right"|1688||
|-
|toothbrushes||align="right"|1690||
|-
|romance||align="right"|1690||
|-
|adeptness||align="right"|1691||
|-
|dowsing||align="right"|1691||
|-
|processioned||align="right"|1691||
|-
|missioned||align="right"|1692||
|-
|vessels||align="right"|1694||
|-
|flabbiness||align="right"|1694||
|-
|penmanship||align="right"|1695||
|-
|Ojibwa||align="right"|1700||
|-
|actualized||align="right"|1701||
|-
|established||align="right"|1702||
|-
|copped||align="right"|1704||
|-
|liability||align="right"|1705||
|-
|sniggers||align="right"|1706||
|-
|dyspeptic||align="right"|1706||
|-
|crunch||align="right"|1706||
|-
|hibiscuses||align="right"|1706||
|-
|stencil||align="right"|1707||
|-
|quadruplet||align="right"|1709||
|-
|primness||align="right"|1709||
|-
|stocks||align="right"|1709||
|-
|leaseholds||align="right"|1710||
|-
|rheumatic||align="right"|1711||
|-
|papilla||align="right"|1713||
|-
|presentiments||align="right"|1714||
|-
|tantrum||align="right"|1714||
|-
|needling||align="right"|1715||
|-
|impersonating||align="right"|1715||
|-
|settees||align="right"|1716||
|-
|hustling||align="right"|1720||
|-
|unassuming||align="right"|1722||
|-
|Houyhnhnm||align="right"|1726||
|-
|knotholes||align="right"|1726||
|-
|Lilliput||align="right"|1726||
|-
|soporifics||align="right"|1727||
|-
|Shinto||align="right"|1727||
|-
|bludgeons||align="right"|1730||
|-
|pillboxes||align="right"|1730||
|-
|pantheistic||align="right"|1732||
|-
|vampires||align="right"|1732||
|-
|palaver||align="right"|1735||
|-
|Stilton||align="right"|1736||
|-
|incriminates||align="right"|1736||
|-
|philanders||align="right"|1737||
|-
|exiled||align="right"|1737||
|-
|coterie||align="right"|1738||
|-
|cantaloupe||align="right"|1739||
|-
|wham||align="right"|1739||
|-
|swipe||align="right"|1739||
|-
|icings||align="right"|1740||
|-
|segueing||align="right"|1740||
|-
|insulates||align="right"|1741||
|-
|flatiron||align="right"|1743||
|-
|uncharacteristic||align="right"|1748||
|-
|cornmeal||align="right"|1749||
|-
|develop||align="right"|1750||
|-
|spindling||align="right"|1750||
|-
|measurements||align="right"|1751||
|-
|pompon||align="right"|1751||
|-
|fanciers||align="right"|1751||
|-
|lumberyard||align="right"|1753||
|-
|riffles||align="right"|1754||
|-
|personification||align="right"|1755||
|-
|mesquites||align="right"|1759||
|-
|maniacs||align="right"|1763||
|-
|pronouncing||align="right"|1764||
|-
|frivolity||align="right"|1764||
|-
|aboriginals||align="right"|1767||
|-
|Afghans||align="right"|1767||
|-
|paws||align="right"|1769||
|-
|mynas||align="right"|1769||
|-
|modernization||align="right"|1770||
|-
|coagulants||align="right"|1770||
|-
|hairpin||align="right"|1771||
|-
|fagged||align="right"|1772||
|-
|Ta||align="right"|1772||
|-
|propertied||align="right"|1772||
|-
|fagging||align="right"|1772||
|-
|pups||align="right"|1773||
|-
|gibbon||align="right"|1774||
|-
|gecko||align="right"|1774||
|-
|passé||align="right"|1775||
|-
|clannish||align="right"|1776||
|-
|gnu||align="right"|1777||
|-
|gasses||align="right"|1779||
|-
|balalaika||align="right"|1780||
|-
|congressman||align="right"|1780||
|-
|fumigate||align="right"|1781||
|-
|varying||align="right"|1781||
|-
|minutiae||align="right"|1782||
|-
|effervesce||align="right"|1784||
|-
|bangle||align="right"|1787||
|-
|letups||align="right"|1787||
|-
|thyroids||align="right"|1787||
|-
|loots||align="right"|1788||
|-
|Hollands||align="right"|1788||
|-
|Dolly||align="right"|1790||
|-
|weakfish||align="right"|1791||
|-
|rutabagas||align="right"|1791||
|-
|equalizer||align="right"|1792||
|-
|steeplechase||align="right"|1793||
|-
|daredevils||align="right"|1794||
|-
|commentated||align="right"|1794||
|-
|embeds||align="right"|1794||
|-
|telegraphy||align="right"|1795||
|-
|soled||align="right"|1795||
|-
|allover||align="right"|1796||
|-
|titanium||align="right"|1796||
|-
|quizzically||align="right"|1797||
|-
|stashes||align="right"|1797||
|-
|kilogram||align="right"|1797||
|-
|belittled||align="right"|1797||
|-
|Mon||align="right"|1798||
|-
|bibliographies||align="right"|1802||
|-
|fezes||align="right"|1803||
|-
|dressmaking||align="right"|1803||
|-
|condoned||align="right"|1805||
|-
|coarsening||align="right"|1805||
|-
|gumbos||align="right"|1805||
|-
|peewee||align="right"|1806||
|-
|lassos||align="right"|1807||
|-
|Pueblos||align="right"|1808||
|-
|blinder||align="right"|1809||
|-
|eddied||align="right"|1810||
|-
|scurrying||align="right"|1810||
|-
|milliliter||align="right"|1810||
|-
|miffed||align="right"|1811||
|-
|quintet||align="right"|1811||
|-
|aluminum||align="right"|1812||
|-
|shawling||align="right"|1812||
|-
|tossup||align="right"|1812||
|-
|opalescent||align="right"|1813||
|-
|vocalic||align="right"|1814||
|-
|Swahili||align="right"|1814||
|-
|nocturnes||align="right"|1814||
|-
|underpaying||align="right"|1817||
|-
|diarist||align="right"|1818||
|-
|intellectualizes||align="right"|1819||
|-
|stethoscope||align="right"|1820||
|-
|bloodstain||align="right"|1820||
|-
|squawk||align="right"|1821||
|-
|suffragist||align="right"|1822||
|-
|caffeine||align="right"|1823||
|-
|flysheet||align="right"|1825||
|-
|augmented||align="right"|1825||
|-
|subway||align="right"|1825||
|-
|crotchety||align="right"|1825||
|-
|pullout||align="right"|1825||
|-
|beadier||align="right"|1826||
|-
|mammal||align="right"|1826||
|-
|chaffed||align="right"|1827||
|-
|clinics||align="right"|1827||
|-
|recruitment||align="right"|1828||
|-
|mas||align="right"|1829||
|-
|mesmerizing||align="right"|1829||
|-
|constitutionals||align="right"|1829||
|-
|cahoots||align="right"|1829||
|-
|homeopathic||align="right"|1830||
|-
|pterodactyl||align="right"|1830||
|-
|cadres||align="right"|1830||
|-
|hex||align="right"|1830||
|-
|chipmunks||align="right"|1832||
|-
|Horus||align="right"|1832||
|-
|toothpastes||align="right"|1832||
|-
|cottonmouths||align="right"|1832||
|-
|underplays||align="right"|1833||
|-
|dorsals||align="right"|1834||
|-
|cetaceans||align="right"|1835||
|-
|wholeheartedly||align="right"|1836||
|-
|creepily||align="right"|1836||
|-
|étude||align="right"|1837||
|-
|Confucianism||align="right"|1837||
|-
|scatting||align="right"|1838||
|-
|smokestacks||align="right"|1838||
|-
|pretzel||align="right"|1838||
|-
|upheaval||align="right"|1838||
|-
|Bunker||align="right"|1839||
|-
|mushier||align="right"|1839||
|-
|bushings||align="right"|1839||
|-
|OK||align="right"|1839||
|-
|mesa||align="right"|1840||
|-
|wastrel||align="right"|1841||
|-
|pyromaniac||align="right"|1842||
|-
|Assam||align="right"|1842||
|-
|Spitz||align="right"|1842||
|-
|wisteria||align="right"|1842||
|-
|cubbyhole||align="right"|1842||
|-
|kinkiest||align="right"|1844||
|-
|Limoges||align="right"|1844||
|-
|taillights||align="right"|1844||
|-
|subgroups||align="right"|1845||
|-
|garnisheeing||align="right"|1846||
|-
|Joe||align="right"|1846||
|-
|tobogganed||align="right"|1846||
|-
|snobby||align="right"|1846||
|-
|strapless||align="right"|1846||
|-
|cheekily||align="right"|1846||
|-
|orgiastic||align="right"|1846||
|-
|funnest||align="right"|1846||
|-
|tactlessness||align="right"|1847||
|-
|tailcoats||align="right"|1847||
|-
|gynecologists||align="right"|1847||
|-
|cartography||align="right"|1847||
|-
|tenderfeet||align="right"|1849||
|-
|laterals||align="right"|1851||
|-
|educations||align="right"|1851||
|-
|trunks||align="right"|1851||
|-
|hangars||align="right"|1852||
|-
|colloids||align="right"|1852||
|-
|delimits||align="right"|1852||
|-
|delimited||align="right"|1852||
|-
|davenport||align="right"|1853||
|-
|Russians||align="right"|1854||
|-
|abnormality||align="right"|1854||
|-
|rainfall||align="right"|1854||
|-
|Brewer||align="right"|1855||
|-
|hazings||align="right"|1855||
|-
|vendetta||align="right"|1855||
|-
|pullouts||align="right"|1855||
|-
|warlords||align="right"|1856||
|-
|seismographs||align="right"|1858||
|-
|interbreeding||align="right"|1859||
|-
|emulsification||align="right"|1859||
|-
|pub||align="right"|1859||
|-
|soulfulness||align="right"|1860||
|-
|Darwinian||align="right"|1860||
|-
|flautist||align="right"|1860||
|-
|pipelines||align="right"|1860||
|-
|ewe||align="right"|1861||
|-
|bellboy||align="right"|1861||
|-
|trapezes||align="right"|1861||
|-
|ewes||align="right"|1861||
|-
|railroading||align="right"|1862||
|-
|isomorphic||align="right"|1862||
|-
|canapé||align="right"|1863||
|-
|columns||align="right"|1863||
|-
|octets||align="right"|1864||
|-
|coffeecakes||align="right"|1865||
|-
|goulash||align="right"|1866||
|-
|sudsier||align="right"|1866||
|-
|maverick||align="right"|1867||
|-
|safaris||align="right"|1868||
|-
|rangier||align="right"|1868||
|-
|mailbox||align="right"|1868||
|-
|rotting||align="right"|1870||
|-
|saprophyte||align="right"|1870||
|-
|agenda||align="right"|1871||
|-
|roomers||align="right"|1871||
|-
|masterminds||align="right"|1872||
|-
|deforest||align="right"|1874||
|-
|spaghetti||align="right"|1874||
|-
|intercollegiate||align="right"|1874||
|-
|Helicon||align="right"|1875||
|-
|dermatitis||align="right"|1876||
|-
|semiprivate||align="right"|1876||
|-
|toniest||align="right"|1877||
|-
|supplies||align="right"|1878||
|-
|quirking||align="right"|1878||
|-
|wagged||align="right"|1879||
|-
|onionskin||align="right"|1879||
|-
|bacillus||align="right"|1879||
|-
|clobber||align="right"|1879||
|-
|steamrollered||align="right"|1879||
|-
|alumna||align="right"|1879||
|-
|locoweed||align="right"|1879||
|-
|toeholds||align="right"|1880||
|-
|paternalism||align="right"|1881||
|-
|adrenals||align="right"|1882||
|-
|syndicating||align="right"|1882||
|-
|winery||align="right"|1882||
|-
|interface||align="right"|1882||
|-
|infantryman||align="right"|1883||
|-
|worldlier||align="right"|1883||
|-
|shyest||align="right"|1884||
|-
|showdowns||align="right"|1884||
|-
|oilfield||align="right"|1884||
|-
|words||align="right"|1884||
|-
|fixating||align="right"|1885||
|-
|micron||align="right"|1885||
|-
|stagehand||align="right"|1885||
|-
|contraceptives||align="right"|1886||
|-
|sensitization||align="right"|1887||
|-
|parachutists||align="right"|1888||
|-
|sandblaster||align="right"|1888||
|-
|erogenous||align="right"|1889||
|-
|lactating||align="right"|1889||
|-
|psychopathics||align="right"|1890||
|-
|reactor||align="right"|1890||
|-
|unsnaps||align="right"|1892||
|-
|decolletes||align="right"|1894||
|-
|inbound||align="right"|1894||
|-
|marihuana||align="right"|1894||
|-
|encapsulated||align="right"|1894||
|-
|erythrocytes||align="right"|1894||
|-
|sequinned||align="right"|1894||
|-
|defrosted||align="right"|1895||
|-
|sacks||align="right"|1895||
|-
|phonemes||align="right"|1896||
|-
|mescaline||align="right"|1896||
|-
|ions||align="right"|1896||
|-
|midyear||align="right"|1896||
|-
|redwoods||align="right"|1897||
|-
|happenstances||align="right"|1897||
|-
|sandhog||align="right"|1897||
|-
|eggs||align="right"|1898||
|-
|taxicab||align="right"|1899||
|-
|concoction||align="right"|1675||
|}
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:49, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

: I identified several dozen words as possibly conservative. But the problem here is that a general sample does not catch enough real conservative words. Still, you might assess the centuries of my selections (I didn't look at any dates before making these selections) and we can go from there.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:36, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

::Thank you for your work! I now added the dates of the words, as found automatically at the Merriam-Webster. Here a first table:
{|class="wikitable"
!
!16s
!17s
!18s
!Σ
|-
!conservative words
|15||9||17||41
|-
!all words
|176||114||210||500
|-
!percentage of conservative words
|8.52%||7.89%||8.1%||8.2%
|}

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 11:29, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

::: That's a fascinating analysis, but its meaning is simply this: roughly 8% of all new words are conservative in nature. That is greater than the number of words I would have identified as liberal in nature.

::: But very few of these words qualified for our list, which expressly consists of the "''best''" new conservative words. Those words are being generated at a geometric rate.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:55, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

== Destruction of words ==

Andy, your model takes into account only the ''creation'' of new words. But in any living language, words fall out of use, too.

Imagine a country where a constant number of ''conservative words'' is created each year, but where these words have a half-time of 100 years, that is, e.g, only half of the words used in 1600 were still in use in 1700.

Such a country would have the same distribution of conservative words as [[Conservapedia's Law]] implies - but the overall number of conservative words becomes constant after a while...

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 10:02, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

: The conservative words are remarkably durable and long-lasting, while the liberal terms (like "population control") fall out of favor quite quickly.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:17, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

== PERFECTION: 20-40-80-160 BY CENTURY ==

For my statistical analysis, I recounted the words in the table: in fact, the
numbers in the small table of the words per century doesn't match the list of
the conservative words:

{|class="wikitable"
!century
!17th
!18th
!19th
!20th
!21st
|-
!claimed
|20||40||80||160||13
|-
!recount
|20||40||81||150||14
|}

An examination of the page's history showed that on Oct 31, 2009 this error was
introduced (with ''Segway'') - and preserved ever since.

{|class="wikitable"
!century
!17th
!18th
!19th
!20th
!21st
|-
!pre Segway
|14||28||56||112||6
|-
!post Segway
|15||28||56||124||6
|-
!my count
|15||29||57||114||6
|}

How does this confirm that ''selection bias'' is the driving force behind the [[Conservapedia's law]]? Well (ignoring the 21st century for a while), if this law holds then ~53% of the words you find should be from the 20th century, ~47% from the three earlier centuries.

But in the time from Oct 31, 2009 until Apr , 2010 when you claimed ''17-34-70-141 by century - spectacular, near-perfect geometric growth continues'', you found only 17 words from the last century, and 22 older words, that is, instead of 53% / 47% the odds of 44% / 56% !

After reaching this mile stone, your ratio rebounded...

So, you always reached your goal, though this was an arbitrary one, set by a typo. This implies that you are actively targeting a ratio, and that this ratio is independent of a actual distribution of the conservative words.

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 11:16, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

: Typos and counting errors are, of course, inevitable; your own comment above has an error in its last seven words. Errors can be found in the greatest of works, such as [[Bernard Riemann]]'s famous mathematical lecture. None of this undermines the value of Riemann's work ... or ours. The best new conservative words do double by century, and it would be nearly impossible to identify such a large number closely fitting that pattern unless the underlying pattern existed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:06, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

You are right: It´s not about typos - it's about the phenomenon I'll explain in the following section
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 10:46, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

== Too Good to be True ==

Imagine the hypothesis: There are as many male writers as there are female
ones.

To proof this hypothesis, round for round, a player '''A''' names a male author,
then a player '''B''' a female one. The round one player runs out of names - and
the other doesn't- the hypothesis is falsified. If both stop in the same round,
the hypothesis is true.

But what can be said about the validity of the hypothesis before this last
round? There are thousands and thousands of authors, what do we know when we
reach round 300?

Nothing. At least nothing about the ratio of female and male authors! In fact,
imagine the game with player '''A''' naming ''two'' male authors for each of
player '''B''''s female writer. After 300 rounds, this game is far from being
finished, but we can't conclude anything!

Unless this game is played to its end, it's just an exercise in futility.

Statistics try to find methods which allow to draw conclusions without exhausting the whole population1

So, what's another way to create data for validating or falsifying the
hypothesis? Let's think of player '''S''' who says that he will gather authors
at random - and that this list will beautifully exemplify the hypothesis.

And so it does: he gives a couple of hundred names and - lo and behold - exactly
half of them are males! He even goes a step further and says that each two
consecutive name would mirror the hypothesis.

When would you start to suspect that he is not an honest player? The probability
that a pair of authors consists from a man and a woman is 1/2. And in a random
list of names, you'll find many such pairs. But if '''S''' announces: the next
pair is gender-mixed, the one thereafter, too, and the next one, again - that's
like predicting three ''heads'' when tossing a coin three times. If he does it
ten times, you would be a fool not to think that something fishy is happening,
i.e., that the names are not taken from a random list of authors, but in fact
are chosen deliberately. His data is just ''too good to be true''!

Such a list has no more significance than the first couple of hundred names
generated by our players '''A''' and '''B'''.

Andy, I hope you see how this scenario applies to your method of generating
''best conservative new words''.

At least four times you announced the start of a new ''layer'', and each time,
you were able to complete it perfectly. Though the probability to find the
combination 1-2-4-8 for 15 words may be bigger than for each other combination,
it's at best 2.6508% . Doing this four times in a row yields odds of
1:2,000,000.

Again, your findings are just ''too good to be true'', therefore, they are not
believable, and don't support your claims made in [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law]].

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 10:46, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

: Disbelief of something because it is "too good to be true" is not a strong argument against it. Perhaps it is not precisely true as stated, but is a rough approximation, for example. Your specific arguments against the proposition above don't withstand scrutiny.

: Finding the best new conservative words is like drilling for oil. Of course it is not a random process. That would be silly. But the lack of randomness does not mean that no intelligent conclusions can be drawn. We can properly conclude that there is more oil in the Arabian Peninsula than in Pennsylvania, where oil was first discovered, despite the lack of randomness in drilling oil wells. Our conclusion would be based on the difference in output, and the implausibility that ''any'' reasonable selection technique would produce such a differential if there were not also an underlying difference.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:06, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

== A summary with graphs... ==

On June 9, 2009, Andrew Schlafly proclaimed his [[Essay:Conservapedia's Law]]: <blockquote>'''Conservapedia's Law''' ''is the observation that conservative insights increase over time at a geometric rate, as in 1-2-4-8-16-etc. 
''For example, there is a doubling in effective new conservative terms per century. </blockquote> This remarkable precise observation was bolstered over the time by a list of 300 ''conservative words''
<blockquote>''Powerful, insightful new conservative terms have grown at a geometric rate, roughly doubling every century. For every insightful new conservative term originating in the 1600s, there are two new terms originating in the 1700s, four new terms in the 1800s, and eight new terms in the 1900s, for a pattern of "1-2-4-8". This implies a more conservative future and a correlation between conservatism and truth. The year 1612 is our starting point: the King James Version of the Bible was published in 1611, and William Shakespeare had written nearly all his plays. ''</blockquote>

{|
|The pic on the right shows the percentage of terms per century in which they were first mentioned.
|[[File:Bcw-001.png|thumb|Best Conservative New Words]]
|-
|The distribution of these ''conservative words'' is even more remarkable as it doesn't reflect the general trends of creating new words. To exemplify this, I took a sample of ≈ 42,000 words from the word-book of my ubuntu-distribution and checked their creation date with the Merriam-Webster (the gray areas of the two diagrams overlap)
|[[File:Bcw-002.png|thumb|distribution of 42,000 words]]
|-
|To convince Andy Schlafly's that the distribution of the words in his list is just an artifact generated by [[sample bias]], I at first showed that it doesn't hold for shorter periods of time than centuries. But Andy Schlafly told me that he didn't see ''any merit'' in my challenge: ''The entry observes that new terms are generated at higher rates during productive periods within decades, for example just after or during religious awakenings.''
|[[File:Bcw-003.png|thumb|Cons. Words per Decade]]
|-
|Interestingly, I couldn't observe any effect of the ''Great Religious Awakenings'', neither in the number of ''conservative words'' nor in the number of all words.
|[[Image:Bcw-004.png|thumb|All Words per Decade]]
|}
No methodology is given how the ''conservative words'' are detected and gathered. To put the whole thing on a sounder ground, I asked Andrew Schlafly to take an unbiased text: I gave him a list of 500 words, which were - according to the [[Merriam Webster]] - first mentioned between 1600 and 1999. Andrew Schlafly objected to this sample as newer words are not well represented in word-books. When I propelled a second sample, consisting of 500 words all originated between 1600 and 1899 (300 years should be enough to prove his law), he was willing to mark the words he things to be conservative.

I'm very grateful that Andrew Schlafly took part in my little experiment: Thank you!

{|
|The five hundred words were taken at random from the suitable subset of the 42,000 words which I had dated, and so the sample distribution matches the overall distribution
|[[File:Bcw-005.png|thumb|500 Words per Centuries]]
|-
|Andrew Schlafly identified 41 words (8.2%) as conservative. The distribution of these 41 words over the centuries does not show a geometric progression.
|[[Image:Bcw-006.png|thumb|Identified as Conservative]]
|-
|In fact, their distribution mirrors the distribution of the whole sample, as each century ≈ 8% of the words are identified as ''conservative''
|[[File:Bcw-007.png|thumb|Percentages]]
|-
|This linearly dependence can be found for shorter periods of time (here for steps of 20 years) - and is found to be statistically significant.
|[[File:Bcw-008.png|thumb|Periods of 20 years]]
|-
|A striking contrast to this is the absence of any connection between Andrew Schlafly's list of over 300 conservative words, and a general distribution of the creation of words.
|[[File:Bcw-009.png|thumb|Periods of 20 years]]
|-
|However, if one maps the percentage of words in - e.g. - a 20 years' period in the corresponding century (24% of all 20th-century word are from the 1900s, 18% from the 1920s, 26% from the 1940s, and so forth...), one finds again a positive correlation.
|[[File:Bcw-010.png|thumb|percentages over 20 years]]
|}

Andrew Schlafly explains the discrepancies as follows:<blockquote>That's a
fascinating analysis, but its meaning is simply this: roughly 8% of all new
words are conservative in nature. That is greater than the number of words I
would have identified as liberal in nature. But very few of these words
qualified for our list, which expressly consists of the "best" new conservative
words. Those words are being generated at a geometric rate.--Andy Schlafly
11:55, 28 July 2010 (EDT) </blockquote>

I've to take exception to this: Andrew Schlafly has shown that he is able to
generate candidates for his list for any time period as it is needed to fit his
prediction. He could as easily make a list following a 1-3-9-27 (or 2-3-5-7-11)
pattern.

Even a claim like: ''the number of Best New Conservative Words'' is not corroborated in any way by the list of the [[Essay:Best New Conservative Words]], and the geometric progressions seems to be just the approximation of a phantasy.

[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 13:23, 3 August 2010 (EDT)

:Ron, your quantity of commentary is impressive and your graphs (the ones that show up) are informative. But quantity is no substitute or quality. You never addressed my point above about how finding the ''best'' conservative words is like drilling for oil. Even if the same percentage of drills in Pennsylvania struck oil as in the Arabian Peninsula, that would not mean that both regions are equal for drilling for oil. Much better wells can be found in the Arabian Peninsula, and that's what this analysis is all about. Those good Arabian wells cannot be found in Pennsylvania, even though oil was first discovered there.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:04, 3 August 2010 (EDT)

::*''Ron, your quantity of commentary is impressive and your graphs (the ones that show up) are informative.'' Thanks. BTW, all the graphs are in Conservapedia's database - you can get directly to the missing two [http://conservapedia.com/images/d/d1/Bcw-003.png bcw-003.png] and [http://conservapedia.com/images/a/a0/Bcw-004.png bcw-004.png]. It seems that the thumbs and the previews weren't produced correctly - maybe a glitch in your software to which you want attend?
::*''But quantity is no substitute or quality.'' You mad a couple of quantifiable claims (''1-2-4-8 pattern''), so a quantitative analysis is what you get. You may rest assured that the quality of my information is good, too, and the math behind the analysis is sound: It's just basic statistics done with R.
::*''You never addressed my point above about how finding the best conservative words is like drilling for oil. '' As far as metaphors go, this isn't such a bad one: Imagine four oil fields. If you put one, two, four and eight wells on them, you get oil out of them according to your geometric progression. This works as long as there is enough oils in the fields, but you can say something about the amount of oil in the fields at first when they start getting dry. The English language is very rich, it seems that 8% of its words are conservative, so there should be an abundance even of ''best conservative words''. Until you have sucked a century dry, you cannot say anything about the distribution of the ''best conservative words''.

::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 08:14, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

One way of marrying the two ideas above (that there is no increase of conservative terms over time and that there is an increase in the "best" conservative terms over time) is simply to suggest that conservative terms are getting better in quality and not quantity, which is the point that Mr. Schlafly makes, I believe. An explanation that might want to be considered is that after a new term is coined, it may slowly lose its relevence over time. I would suggest that if you look at the vocabulary from the 17th century, many words have lost their relevence greatly. This presumably applies to conservative terms as well. So, a partial explanation for conservative terms increasing in "quality" over time may be the decrease in time-lag and thus an increase in relevence.--[[User:GrahamB|GrahamB]] 12:15, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

== Decrypt ==

Can I challenge 'decrypt' as a conservative word? Take the greatest decryption exercise in history, the breaking of the German Enigma code in World War 2 by British and Polish cryptographers. Alan Turing, who made the crucial breakthrough, was homosexual. Several others involved may have been communist sympathisers. The great majority were recruited from either the civil service (= Big Government) or universities (= Professor Values) and returned to those professions when WW2 was over. Bottom line: not a very conservative bunch. (Check [http://www.bletchleypark.org.uk the Bletchley Park website].) [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 18:05, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

: Beware of [[liberal]] revisionism, where historians try to give credit to liberals for achievements no matter how unjustified. It was Polish mathematicians who decrypted the enigma, not an Englishman. The British are notoriously weak in mathematics.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:11, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

:: Andy, you don't seem to know so much about the decoding of Enigma. I gave you the reference to the Bletchley Park website so you can read about it there. The main contributions from the Poles were (1) stealing a German Enigma machine, (2) working out how Enigma encoded messages, (3) getting the Enigma machine to the Brits and (4) proposing a method for automated decoding of ciphers (the "Bombe"). The bombes that were eventually built were constructed by British engineers and used some principles but not the details of the Polish mathematicians' idea. Pretty much everything else was done by the British, including the first decipherment of Enigma, the second decipherment when the German Navy introduced a more sophisticated code, and the building of Colussus, the world's first programmable electronic computer, which played an essential role in decoding the later, more complex Enigma codes used by the U-boat fleet. Turing's role was crucial (that ain't liberal revisionism - go on, read about it). Some Poles who'd escaped to England did indeed work with the British but it just ain't true that they decoded Enigma.
:: As for "the British are notoriously weak in math": you're having a laugh, as my British colleagues would say. [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 19:47, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

::: Benjy, British liberals famously support and credit each other, often undeservedly so. If you find a great British mathematician who ranks with the best in the world, please do tell us who he is!

::: As to decoding the Enigma, perhaps the Brits did some machinery to help, but the mathematicians who provided the brainpower were Poles.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:14, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

:::: Sir Isaac Newton was a British liberal (he was a non-standard Christian that wrote extensively on the occult) who was the first to scientifically describe gravity and his 1687 publication ''Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica'' is considered the seminal work in classical mechanics. The top physicists in the world consider Newton one of the two greatest physicists in history, and his name is still used in science today, for example, "a non-Newtonian fluid". He may also have been homosexual, conisdering he was largely sexless in an age where homosexuality could get you burned at the stake. [[User:JohnQP|JohnQP]] 21:44, 5 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::Brilliant logic. 17th century tabloids tell us little of the women in Newton's life, therefore, there must not have been any. As for his writings on the occult, perhaps your referring to his beliefs that some tales in Ovid's Metamorpheses were inspired by physical fact? If I recall, he was proved right in this regard, when he demonstrated that the chemicals which corresponding to classical elements ascribed to certain mythological figures actually, in one case, produced a cracking purple "web-like" effect when combined - just as in Ovid's story. I'd hardly call this un-Christian, especially since he also used translating the Bible as inspiration for much of his work. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]][[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]] 21:50, 5 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::I must agree with you, JacobB. This is nothing other than rank liberal revisionism of the highest order. Slandering the good name of such a noble Christian is just plainly offensive. --[[User:CathyB|CathyB]] 21:54, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

''" If you find a great British mathematician who ranks with the best in the world, please do tell us who he is!"'' - Here is a small list of some whom I would consider to rank with the world's best (in no particular order):
* Sir Isaac Newton
* Charles Babbage
* Alan Turing
* G.H. Hardy
* Bertrand Russell
* Roger Penrose
* Andrew Wiles
* Arthur Cayley
* William Rowan Hamilton
* George Boole
* Augustus De Morgan
Whilst I agree that Polish mathematicians played an important role in cracking the Enigma code, but to jump from that to saying that not only are there no great British mathematicians, but that also Brits are 'notoriously weak' at maths - is clearly unfair and incorrect. [[User:FionaN|FionaN]] 07:40, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

: While I am respectful of the contributions of those on your list, as a group they are a far cry from the greatest mathematicians and many would not be considered "British". Hamilton was Irish, for example, and Newton was pre-modern and pre-Britain. Wiles did his work in the U.S. Russell's work was deflated by Godel, and others on the list don't even come close to being great mathematicians.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:21, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

:: Fiona seems to miss the varying degrees of "mathematician", "great mathematician", and "one of the greatest mathematicians" as if they're all the same thing. We saw the same thing when another contributor was unable to grasp the difference between "conservative words" and "best conservative words". It's as if liberals can see everything in the world only in black and white terms, as if everything falls perfectly into one of two categories, e.g. "mathematician" and "not-mathematician". I think this is another example of [[Liberal Inability To Abstract]]. [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 14:42, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

Andy, you stated: "It was Polish mathematicians who decrypted the enigma, not an Englishman" and "The British are notoriously weak in mathematics". Both these statements are not only untrue but ridiculous. I've tried to contribute to this encyclopedia but I'm not going to waste my time messing around if you fill it up with your own uninformed prejudices, refuse to do some easy reading to check your facts, and get absurdly defensive when your statements are corrected by people who are more knowledgeable on the subject in question. ''Laziness is not a conservative character trait, least of all intellectual laziness.'' Please tell me if you're going to check your facts before shooting your mouth off in future, in which case I'd be pleased to continue contributing to CP. [[User:BenjyB|BenjyB]] 15:40, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

: Benjy, please rant somewhere else instead. We tell the truth here, whether [[Anglophile]]s accept it or not. The relative weakness of [[Britain]] in mathematics is an objective fact.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:44, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::Have you any proof for your assertion? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 16:37, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::(EC) Hi Andy. Are you talking about mathematical ability in the general UK population, or about the number of major contributions to the field by British mathematicians? Thanks, --[[User:JoanZ|JoanZ]] 16:48, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

:::(EC) Look at any list of the greatest mathematicians of the past 200 and count how many were from Britain. Or list the greatest modern mathematical achievements and count how many came out of Britain. I'm sorry liberals don't teach this, and that's why there is a need for Conservapedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:50, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::::According to [http://fabpedigree.com/james/mathmen.htm this blog], 9 of 99 were British - and that's an all time, Ancient Greece to present list. Now you; would you care to support your position with sources? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:05, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::And ''your source'' comes from a ''blog?'' How about you, SamI, come up with non-blog, official sources yourself to support ''your'' position. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:16, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::Rather a blog than my own imagination. Would Andy care to provide his sources? The burden of proof, and all that. [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:21, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::(EC)[http://www.sci.hkbu.edu.hk/scilab/math/math.html This list gives 3 British and 1 Irish out of 14.] And why do I keep having to fill out captcha boxes? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:25, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::Andy said "Look at '''any''' list" (my emphasis). This is a list already on the Internet so SamI is just following Andy's advice. Please note that there are '''no''' people on that list who were born in the U.S.A. [[User:GeoffA|GeoffA]] 17:23, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::Guess what...you, SamI, just accused Andy of using his own imagination, and since you, GeoffA, is supportive of Sam's statement, both of you are going to get official sources to support your side, otherwise I'm going to assume you are using your own imaginations just to troll here. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:31, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::::I would say that the second source I posted above is fairly official. And why do we need to support our side, but Andy doesn't have to support his beyond saying 'oh, it's an objective fact'? [[User:SamI|SamI]] 17:39, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::How about the [[Fields Medal]] as a rough proxy? I count six awarded to UK mathematicians out of a total of 48 (12.5%), compared to thirteen awarded to Americans (~27%). Not bad for a small island. --[[User:JoanZ|JoanZ]] 17:27, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

::::: Well there you go "Karajou". Since the USA has a population ~5 times larger than the UK, it looks like the UK is doing pretty well. And don't you think Andy can talk for himself without you leaping to his side? What are '''your''' sources to support his statement? [[User:GeoffA|GeoffA]] 17:36, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::There are better ways to prove us wrong then by coming here and making demands; one of those ways is to provide a reasonable explanation which supports your position, backed up by valid sources, and being polite about the whole thing. See ya in a couple hours. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:44, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

(outdent) Well I used the two "ours" you gave me to find some sources.

How about this [http://www.virtualimage.co.uk/html/great_mathematicians.html commercial source]? Of the 20 mathematiciams, John Napier, Ada Lovelace, Lewis Carroll, Alan Turing and William Oughtred are British. That's 25%. No Americans.

Or how about [http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2010/apr/11/the-10-best-mathematicians this] article listing a top 10? 1 Brit - no Americans.

The Scientific Computing Laboratory at Hong Kong Baptist University [http://www.sci.hkbu.edu.hk/scilab/math/math.html lists] four Brits out of 14. Yes - Christains disagree with you too.

Another blog (I know you don't like them, but surely the "Best of the Public" is always right? Your boss thinks so) [http://kaushal42.blogspot.com/2008/01/twenty-five-greatest-mathematicians-of.html here] has two Brits out of 25. No Americans.

Centre College [http://web.centre.edu/mat/century.html lists] 24 for last century alone. Four Brits and Five Yanks. That's still not bad for such a poor, small, atheistic island.

Lastly, in the magazine Mathematics Teacher (I.7. Vol.55, 1962), W.C. Eells [http://afrodita.rcub.bg.ac.rs/~flora/100.html published] a list of the 100 greatest mathematicians of all time. I'm not going to go through all 100, but Newton, Napier, Wallis, Hamilton, Barrow, Taylor, Briggs, Babbage, Smith, H.J.S., Cotes, Boole, Halley and Lord Kelvin were all Brits. That's 13/100.

So. There are your sources. I note that SamI can't respond because TK blocked him/her. Since I fully expect the same fate to befall me after this post for having proved you wrong, I'll say goodbye now. I suppose it's unrealistic to expect you or Andy to provide sources to back up ''your'' point of view. [[User:GeoffA|GeoffA]] 19:43, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
:Granted, GeoffA, I would agree with your point that we should provide sources to back up our point of view. But we're not going to do it for someone on demand. And there lies the end of the lesson. Hope you learned something about tact. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 21:05, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

*Is there something in the water over there in the U.K., or is it your atheism? Perhaps its the generally gloomy economic picture and remnants of the class system that make you as you are! Godspeed to all of you. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 17:38, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

Brits, we're talking about '''''mathemsticians''''' in this thread. Do you know what a mathematician is? That's not a physicist (Penrose), a computer geek (Lovelace, Babbage, Turing), or a political hack (Russell). One more tip: the Irish (Hamilton) do not consider themselves to be British.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:25, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

Andy's right -- talk about the MATHEMSTICIANS! By the way, who is going to make an actual response to RonLar's analysis?--[[User:TinOl5|TinOl5]] 22:10, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

Gulf of Mexico oil spill

2010-08-07T02:28:01Z

ChrisGT90: Corrected amount in Gulf, added total amount spilled

[[File:Dispersants spraying.jpg|right|300px|thumb|President Obama directed the [[United States Coast Guard]] to dump [[toxic]] disperants into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] despite known health hazards to humans and wildlife. [http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/] ]]The '''Gulf of Mexico oil spill''' began on 20 April 2010 when the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil drilling rig operated by [[BP]] (known as British Petroleum until 2000) exploded and sank.<ref>[http://www.businessinsider.com/gulf-of-mexico-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-2010-4 Here's The Questions You Should Be Asking About The Gulf Of Mexico Oil Spill]</ref> Oil began leaking at a rate eventually estimated at 2.5 million gallons per day, resulting in massive environmental degradation.<ref>[http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hSaoIddZwUtk-BTcIDuy6AjaHwSgD9GBV0GO0 Scientists: Oil leaking up to 2.52M gallons daily]</ref> The federal government reports that 206 million gallons of crude oil leaked before the spill was stopped on July 15.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38557520/ns/disaster_in_the_gulf Disaster in the Gulf]</ref> The blowout also killed eleven workers. Despite the known [[toxic]]ity of the dispersant Corexit, the [[Obama administration]] dumped millions of gallons of the hazardous chemical into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] with C-130 aircraft provided by the [[U.S. Coast Guard]]<ref>http://vodpod.com/watch/3962219-confirmed-corexit-being-sprayed-from-coast-guard-planes</ref>and the [[Air Force]].<ref>http://bpoilslick.blogspot.com/2010/07/us-air-force-sprays-corexit-from-plane.html</ref>

On 31 March 2010 [[President Obama]] announced a plan for exploitation of offshore oil reserves during a speech at Andrews Air Force Base outside [[Washington, D.C.]]<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/user/AssociatedPress#p/u/6/mA7RAfHN-wo Obama Lifts Ban on Offshore Drilling,] ''[[Associated Press]],'' 31 March 2010. Retrieved from [[Youtube]] 9 May 2010.</ref> The President's actions have been labeled, "a decision to endanger our coastal [[ecosystem]]s with the risk of catastrophic oil spills."<ref>[http://members.greenpeace.org/blog/greenpeaceusa_blog/2010/04/30/president_obama_committed_to_endangering President Obama must reinstate moratorium on offshore drilling,] [[Greenpeace]] USA blogs, 30 Apr 2010.</ref> Defending the decision, the President remarked "oil rigs today generally don’t cause spills. They are technologically very advanced."<ref>White House Press Release, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-a-discussion-jobs-and-economy-charlotte-north-carolina Remarks by the President in a Discussion on Jobs and the Economy in Charlotte, North Carolina,] Office of the Press Secretary, April 02, 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 3 May 2010.</ref><ref>Video: [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/04/29/flashback_obama_says_oil_rigs_today_dont_generally_cause_spills.html Obama Says "Oil Rigs Today Don't Generally Cause Spills"], 2 April 2010. Retrieved from RealClearPolitics.com 12 May 2010.</ref>

Since January 2009 the [[Obama administration]] approved 346 oil drilling plans without securing permits required by law from the [[federal]] agency that assesses environmental impacts.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?partner=rss&emc=rss U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits,] Ian Urbina, ''New York Times'', 13 May 2010. Retrieved 28 May 2010.</ref> [[President Barack Obama]] has been widely criticized for an unprepared and bungled response, most notably from former supporters.
 
{{cquote|'''''<big>We're in charge, but BP is responsible.</big>''''' -- '''Barack Obama, news conference of 5/27/2010'''<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/27/obama-federal-government-charge-oil-spill-response/ Obama news conference, 5/27/10]</ref>}}

As of July 15, BP announced that the gushing well had been successfully capped, although to avoid a pressure build-up, a relief well will have to be drilled. As of August 4, only 26% of the originally leaked oil remains in the Gulf.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38557520/ns/disaster_in_the_gulf Disaster in the Gulf]</ref>

==The Obama plan ==
[[File:OCS Eastern Gulf of Mexico Strategy.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Map of expanded areas of offshore oil drilling authorized by President Obama on 31 March 2010.<ref>[http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/2010/04/01/obama-offshore-oil-drilling-details.htm Obama Offshore Oil Drilling Details,] 1 April 2010. Retrieved from About.com Guide to US Government Info 16 May 2010.</ref> ''Source: United States Department of Interior.'']]
Obama called for expanded development and production throughout the [[Gulf of Mexico]]. The [[Department of Interior]]'s [[Minerals Management Service]] (MMS) estimates that the Gulf of Mexico contains 36-41.5 billion barrels of oil and 161-207 trillion cubic feet of natural gas resources. According a DOI press release, Obama's plan would "expand oil and gas development and exploration" while "protecting fisheries, [[tourism]], and places off U.S. coasts that are not appropriate for development."<ref>[http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/2010_03_31_release.cfm Department of Interior Press Release,] 31 March 2010.</ref>

The ''[[Associated Press]]'' has reported on the role ex-government regulators play in [[lobby]]ing and influence; the chief of staff of the MSS's Gulf of Mexico region once stated that deep water drilling had "few or no regulations or standards."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/a-2649320~INFLUENCE_GAME__Govt_regulators_hired_by_companies.html INFLUENCE GAME: Govt regulators hired by companies,] Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010. Retrieved from examiner.com 26 May 2010.</ref> Two years later the senior official left his job in the MMS to work for BP.<ref>Ibid.</ref> During President Obama's first year in office, as BP's regulatory compliance and environmental manager, the ex-MMS official lobbied the U.S. Ocean Policy Task Force to "carefully weigh policies that may establish exclusionary zones" or "disrupt the MMS leasing program," according to a statement posted at whitehouse.gov.<ref>Influence Game, Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010.</ref> He further stated that BP wanted access to off-limit areas such as the eastern [[Gulf of Mexico]]<ref>Ibid.</ref> which President Obama approved in March 2010.

Total U.S. offshore [[crude oil]] production in 2009 was 1.7 million barrels a day, of which 1.6 million barrels a day came from the U.S. section of the Gulf of Mexico.<ref>[http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/info_glance/petroleum.html Energy Information Administration.]</ref>

According to the ''New York Times'', President Obama "said several times during his [[Barack Hussein Obama 2008 Presidential campaign|presidential campaign]] that he supported expanded offshore drilling. He noted in his [[State of the Union]] address<ref>[http://www.c-span.org/Executive/State-of-the-Union.aspx Barack Obama State of the Union Address 2010]. Retrieved from [[C-SPAN]].org 15 May 2010.</ref> in January [2010] that weaning the country from imported oil would require “tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development.”<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/science/earth/31energy.html Obama to Open Offshore Areas to Oil Drilling for First Time,] John M. Broder, ''[[New York Times]]'', March 30, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/03/obama_clears_way_for_oil_drill.html Obama clears way for oil drilling off U.S. coasts], Associated Press, March 31, 2010, Retrieved from nola.com 8 May 2010.</ref>

Nobel Laureate in Economics, Dr. [[Paul Krugman]],<ref>[http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2008/ Economics 2008.] Retrieved from Nobel.org 10 May 2010.</ref> who has been highly critical of Obama [[Obama administration corporate bailouts|economic policy]]<ref>[http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090331151429.aspx Krugman Garners Newsweek Cover for Left-Wing Criticism of [[Obamunism|Obamanomics,]] ] Julia A. Seymour, ''Business & Media Institute'', 3/31/09.</ref> in his regular ''New York Times'' column, ''Conscience of a Liberal'' wrote a piece entitled "The oil spill is Obama's fault," and stated "that’s not what I believe....The only question is what the story will be."<ref>[http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/the-oil-spill-is-obamas-fault/?src=twt&twt=NytimesKrugman The Oil Spill Is Obama’s Fault,] Paul Krugman, ''New York Times '' Op-Ed, 30 April 2010.</ref> When questioned about the Obama regulators "cozy relationship" with oil companies the president responded, "absolutely I take responsibility for that."<ref>[http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-gulf-oil-spill Remarks by President Obama on the Gulf Oil Spill,] Office of the Press Secretary, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 29 May 2010.</ref>
=== Obama administration asks Court to allow BP drilling in the Gulf of Mexico ===

Less than four months after [[President Barack Obama]] took office a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. found that the U.S. Government was unprepared for a major spill at sea, relying on an "irrational" environmental analysis of the risks of offshore drilling. The Obama administration urged the court to revisit the decision. In its arguments to the court, the Obama administration said that the loss of royalties on the oil, estimated at almost $10 billion, "may have significant financial consequences for the federal government."

Among the existing leases was the Lease Sale #206. That deal included BP's acquisition, for $34 million, of the acreage encompassing the Deep Water Horizons well.

A day after the administration's petition, the industry's main lobbying group, the American Petroleum Institute, made its own case echoing the government's arguments. "The significance of [Gulf of Mexico] activities under the five-year program cannot be overstated," the API argued.

Secretary [[Ken Salazar]] expressed confidence that problems within the [[Minerals Management Service]] that led to poor oversight of offshore drilling were resolved. In September 2009, in testimony before the House Natural Resources Committee, Salazar listed steps he had taken to make sure problems "don't occur in the future."

In [[Senate]] hearings held in mid-November 2009, Obama MMS Deputy Director Walter Cruickshank assured the Committee panel fears of containing a catastrophic blowout were misplaced, saying the U.S. had "what we believe is the most aggressive oil spill contingency planning...in the world."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704699604575342843359124882.html</ref>

=== Approval of BP's response plan ===
The [[Obama administration]] accepted and approved BP's regional oil spill response plan for the [[Gulf of Mexico]] dated 30 June 2009<ref>[http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1351 Did anyone actually read BP's oil spill response plan?] Walruses and Seals, Non-Existent Equipment Lists and Other Fanciful References, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from peer.org 19 June 2010.</ref> and covered all the company’s operations in the Gulf. The plan lists
:*“Sea Lions, Seals, Sea Otters [and] [[Walrus]]es” as “Sensitive Biological Resources” in the Gulf, suggesting that portions were cribbed from previous [[Arctic]] exploratory planning;
:* Gives a web site for a [[Japan]]ese home shopping site as the link to one of its “primary equipment providers for BP in the Gulf of Mexico Region [for] rapid deployment of spill response resources on a 24 hour, 7 days a week basis;” and
:* Directs its media spokespeople to never make “promises that [[property]], [[ecology]], or anything else will be restored to normal.”<ref>http://www.mms.gov/DeepwaterHorizon/BP_Regional_OSRP_Redactedv2.pdf</ref>

The government approved plan made no mention about tracking sub-surface oil plumes from deepwater blowouts or preventing [[disease]] ([[virus]]es, [[bacteria]], etc.) transmission to captured [[animal]]s in rehabilitation facilities.

=== British Petroleum ===
During the first 100 days of the [[Obama administration]], the Minerals Management Service ([[MMS]]) of the [[Department of the Interior]] granted a “categorical exclusion” from a detailed environmental impact statement required under [[law]]<ref>[http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/nepa/nepaeqia.htm The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.]</ref> to BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling operation, according to the ''[[Washington Post]].''<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html U.S. exempted BP's Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study,] Juliet Eilperin, ''Washington Post,'' 5 May 2010.</ref> BP's exploration plan received in the Administration's MMS field office on 23 March 2009 states "no mitigation measures other than those required by regulation and BP policy will be employed to avoid, diminish or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources." It declared any spill would have only "sub-lethal" effects on fish and marine [[mammal]]s but it was "unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities."<ref>http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/initial_exploration_plan050410.pdf</ref>

As Senator, and while running for president, [[Barack Obama]] received a total of $77,051 from BP<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/BP?view=detail&siteid=nwhwk</ref> and has taken more money from BP's [[Political Action Committee]] and individuals connected with BP over the past 20 years than any other candidate, according to [[FEC]] disclosure records.<ref>[http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0505/obama-biggest-recipient-bp-political-action-money-20-years Obama is biggest recipient of BP’s political action cash in the last 20 years,] John Byrne, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from rawstory.com 9 May 2010.</ref> Likewise, the independent watchdog Center for Responsive Politics noted, "the “top recipient of BP-related donations during the 2008 cycle was President Barack Obama himself.”<ref>Jake Tapper, Political Punch, [[ABC News]], 5 May 2010. [http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/white-house-idea-that-bp-given-special-exemption-because-of-campaign-cash-to-obama-silly-and-ridiculous.html?cid=6a00d8341c4df253ef0134807669a3970c]</ref><ref>http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/04/on-thursday-oil-giant-bp.html</ref>
[[File:Bp-obama-logo.jpg|right|225px|thumb|Obama approved drilling permits for BP without the statutory requirement to file an environmental impact assessment,<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?partner=rss&emc=rss U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits,] Ian Urbina, ''New York Times'', 13 May 2010.</ref> the handling of spills in a worst-case scenario,<ref>[http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2010/bp-exempted-05-05-2010.html Interior Department Exempted BP Drilling From Environmental Review]: In Rush to Expand Offshore Oil Drilling, Interior Secretary Salazar Abandoned Pledge to Reform
Industry-dominated Mineral Management Service. Press Release, Center for Biological Diversity, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from www.biologicaldiversity.org, 30 May 2010.</ref> and fostered a cozy relationship between government and the oil industry.<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=10745153 Govt Regulators Hired by Companies, Influence Game: Drilling regulators move from government to industry through revolving door,] Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010. Retrieved from abcnews.go.com 30 May 2010.</ref> No other candidate took more money from BP in the past two decades than Obama received in only six years.<ref>[http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html Obama biggest recipient of BP cash,] Erika Lovley, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from Politico.com 30 May 2010.</ref>]]
Talk show personality Ed Schultz of [[MSNBC]] reiterated a call for campaign finance reform as a result of Barack Obama's ties to BP and the government's response.<ref>[http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100602102656.aspx MSNBC's Schultz Draws Bizarre Connection Between Oil Spill and Campaign Finance Reform.] Alex Fitzsimmons, Media Research Center, 2 June 2010.</ref>

Transocean, owner of the Deepwater Horizons drilling rig leased to BP, was the recipient of the Obama [[Mineral Management Service]]'s, ''Safety Award for Excellence''.<ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=66303 Democratic Leader Hoyer Doesn’t Know Whether Obama Administration was Prepared for Oil Spill,] Matt Cover, CNSNews.com, May 20, 2010.</ref><ref>MMS Thought Deepwater Horizon was Award-Winningly SAFE, The Project on Government Oversight, Exposing Government Corruption, 29 April 2010.</ref> On 30 April 2010 Transocean's stock fell after [[President Obama]]’s chief strategist, [[David Axelrod]], made comments nine days into the disaster and the [[government]] raised estimates to more than fives times of what had previously been reported about how much oil was leaking into the [[Gulf of Mexico]].<ref>[http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-30/transocean-drops-after-axelrod-comments-on-drilling-update2-.html Transocean Drops After Axelrod Comments on Drilling,] Edward Klump, ''Bloomberg Business Week'', 30 April 2010. Retrieved 2 June 2010.</ref>

It has been reported in the [[finance|financial]] press that among owners of BP<ref>[http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-aims-at-bp-hits-state-pensions-2010-06-09 President Obama's ramped up rhetoric over the BP oil spill is beginning to have an effect,] ''MarketWatch, 9 June 2010.</ref> are
*New Jersey Division of Investment (51 million shares)
*California Public Employees Retirement System (36 million shares)
*Pennsylvania Public School Employees Retirement System (7.1 million shares)
*Teachers Retirement System of Alabama (4.5 million shares)
*Employees Retirement System of Texas (4.1 million shares)
*Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (1.1 million shares)
*Illinois State Board of Investment (1.1 million shares)<ref>In 1990 Barack Obama took a job with the Law Firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland ([http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/06/nation/na-obamalegal6 Obama's lawyer days: brief and not all civil rights,] Dan Morain, ''Los Angeles Times'' 2008-04-06). Allison S. Davis, a senior partner in the firm, went into business with [[Chicago]] slumlord [[Tony Rezko]]. Davis was appointed to the Illinois State Board of Investment by Governor [[Rod Blagojevich]] at Rezko's request in 2003. ([http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/644511 How reform-minded City Hall critic became a cozy insider,] Tim Novak, ''Chicago Sun-Times'', 2007-11-11).</ref>
*Indiana Public Employees' Retirement Fund (0.7 million shares)
*Washington State Investment Board (1.2 million shares)
*United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund (21.9 million shares).

BP was found [[Negligence|wilfully negligent]] during the [[Bush administration]] in a [[Texas]] refinery explosion incident, and was assessed $108 million in fines - the highest workplace safety fines in U.S. history.<ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/16/60minutes/main6490197_page5.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody Blowout: The Deepwater Horizon Disaster,] ''[[60 Minutes]]'', 16 May 2010. Retrieved from cbsnews.com, 2 June 2010.</ref>

=== Nalco and Corexit ===
[[File:Dermatitis4.jpg|right|375px|thumb|Dermatitis is one immediate health concern<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/28/bp-gulf-oil-spill-pollution Gulf oil spill is public health risk, environmental scientists warn,] Suzanne Goldenberg, ''[[Guardian (uk)]]'', 28 May 2010.</ref> of the [[Obama administration]]'s decision to use [[toxic]] substances to disperse the visibility of the spill.
[http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CB4QFjAD&url=http://www.chemie.uni-regensburg.de/Physikalische_Chemie/Kunz/student/Uebung_Formulierung/Clark_presentation.pdf&rct=j&q=photo+dermatitis+corexit&ei=qn0ITPGEM-qXlAfeo8TSAQ&usg=AFQjCNHp_FTjbxFEzZI4o9iMcapG_kFO3Q&sig2=zxmIoVnIi2vekrq3WB6ztA]Residents, cleanup workers, and tourists alike may be affected. [http://chealth.canoe.ca/channel_health_news_details.asp?news_id=31005&news_channel_id=145&channel_id=145] ]]
Nalco of Naperville, Illinois formed a joint venture with Exxon Chemical in 1994 and the company's current leadership includes several executives from BP. Nalco reported it sold in excess of $40 million to BP of its dispersant, Corexit, shortly after the [[Gulf of Mexico]] oil spill disaster.

Of 18 dispersants approved by the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA), 12 were found to be more effective on southern [[Louisiana]] crude than Corexit, EPA data show.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/business/energy-environment/13greenwire-less-toxic-dispersants-lose-out-in-bp-oil-spil-81183.html Less Toxic Dispersants Lose Out in BP Oil Spill Cleanup,]
Paul Quinlan, ''Greenwire'', May 13, 2010. Retrieved from nytimes.com 25 May 2010.</ref> Two of the 12 were found to be 100 percent effective on [[Gulf of Mexico]] crude, whereas two Corexit products rated only 56 percent and 63 percent effective.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The [[toxic]]ity of the other 12 was shown to be in some cases 10 or 20 times less than Corexit, according to the EPA.<ref>Ibid.</ref> "It's a chemical that the oil industry makes to sell to itself, basically," said Richard Charter, a senior policy adviser for Defenders of Wildlife.<ref>Ibid.</ref>

Corexit was found to be one of the most toxic dispersal agents ever developed.<ref>''Acute Aquatic Toxicity of Three Corexit Products: An Overview'', Anita George-Ares and James R. Clark. Report prepared for Exxon Biomedical Sciences.</ref> With seasonal warming of water temperature the toxicity grows. Corexit is banned in the [[United Kingdom]] due to [[environment]]al concerns.<ref>[http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/05/epa-bp-dispersants Why Is the EPA Letting BP Use Dirty Dispersants?], Kate Sheppard, ''Mother Jones'', 19 May 19 2010.</ref> The Obama EPA gave BP the green light to apply Corexit to the spill.<ref>Ibid.</ref> At the Congressional hearing investigating the Gulf oil spill disaster, [[Democratic]] Representative Jerrold Nadler of [[New York]] raised the prospect of "thousands and thousands of people getting sick or dying" as a result of the administration's sanctioned use of the dispersant.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/science/earth/28workers.html Worry About Dispersant Rises as Men in Work Crew Complain of Health Problems,] Leslie Kaufman and Elizabeth Rosenthal, ''New York Times'', 27 May 2010.</ref> Critics allege use of dispersants like Corexit are largely for cosmetic purposes. Nalco has been a frequent contributor to the campaign of Sen. [[Mary Landrieu]]<ref>http://saveourwetlands.org/index-landrieu.html/</ref> of Louisiana.<ref>http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/fec/?id=273&cycle=2007-2008</ref>

== Deepwater Horizon ==
[[File:Deepwater Horizon Fire.jpg|right|250px|thumb|Fire boat response crews battle the blazing remnants of the off shore oil rig Deepwater Horizon, April 21, 2010 (U.S. Coast Guard)]]
On [[Earth Day]] 2010, a BP-leased oil drilling rig sank to the bottom of the [[Gulf of Mexico]] two days after it exploded, creating what has been described as the "worst environmental disaster in [[American History Lectures|US history]]."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/x-33986-Political-Spin-Examiner~y2010m4d29-Worst-environmental-disaster-in-US-history-Oil-slick-in-Gulf-of-Mexico-is-set-on-fire Worst environmental disaster in US history,] Maryann Tobin, ''Examiner'', April 29, 2010.</ref> [[Secretary of the Interior]] [[Ken Salazar]] told [[CNN]] "It potentially is catastrophic," and "I think we have to prepare for the worst."<ref>[http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/gulf-oil-spill:-impossible-to-measure-impact-of-%22unprecedented-environmental-disaster%22-477603.html?tickers=BP,HAL,CAM,RIG,XLE,OIL,USO Gulf Oil Spill: Impossible to Measure Impact of "Unprecedented Environmental Disaster",] Aaron Task, May 03, 2010. Retrieved from Yahoo Finance 12 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/02/salazar-oil-spill-massive-and-a-potential-catastrophe/ Salazar: Oil spill 'massive' and a potential catastrophe,] [[CNN]], 3 May 2010.</ref>

Congressional investigators think they have identified the rigs blowout preventer as the cause of the explosion. <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703339304575240323493707434.html Congress Homes In on Rig's Blowout Preventer,] Ben Casselman and Jennifer Levitz, ''Wall Street Journal Online,'' 13 May 2010.</ref> The blowout preventer was leaking hydraulic fluid, had a dead battery,<ref>Ibid.</ref> and was inspected by the Obama [[Minerals Management Service]] (MMS) only two weeks before to the explosion<ref>White House Press Office, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/press-briefing-bp-oil-spill-gulf-coast Press Briefing on the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf Coast,] 29 April 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 12 May 2010.</ref> which killed 11 people. [[Amy Goodman]], a [[leftist]] radio talk show host, has suggested those responsible should be [[prosecute]]d for [[manslaughter]].<ref>[http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/law_order_corporate_crime_unit_20100518/ Law & Order,] Amy Goodman, 18 May 2010. Retrieved from truthdigg.com 30 May 2010.</ref>

Blowout preventers are meant to shut off the well, and the last line of defense is a set of shear rams which cut the pipe and seal off the well.<ref>Congress Homes In on Rig's Blowout Preventer, Ben Casselman and Jennifer Levitz, ''WSJ Online,'' 13 May 2010.</ref> The MMS, the [[Obama administration]] agency that regulates offshore drilling along with the Coast Guard, is supposed to require proof that shear rams are powerful enough to shut the well. Michael Saucier, MMS's regional supervisor testified before Congress that the MMS did not require BP to file a "scenario for potential blowout."<ref>Ibid.</ref> The MMS certified that BP "has the capacity to respond, to the maximum extent practicable, to a worst-case discharge, or a substantial threat of such a discharge."<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/29/gulf-oil-spill-exceeds-bp_n_556798.html</ref>

A May 2010 Inspector General's report revealed at least two MMS regulatory inspectors admitted to being under the influence of the [[illegal drug]] [[methamphetamine]] while on the job.<ref>[http://www.wusf.usf.edu/news/2010/05/25/drugs_free_football_tickets_and_porn_at_minerals_management_service Drugs, Free Football Tickets and Porn at Minerals Management Service,] 25 May 2010. Retrieved from wusf.usf.edu 26 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.tgdaily.com/business-and-law-features/49932-us-bureaucrats-smoked-crystal-meth-watched-porn-as-bp-oil-rig-blew US bureaucrats smoked crystal meth, watched porn as BP oil rig blew,] Starr Keshet, 25 May 2010. Retrieved from tgdaily.com 26 May 2010.</ref>

==Environmental disaster ==
[[File:Oil slick map.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Projections of the flow of the spill over the summer of 2010. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37497578/ns/local_news-new_york_ny/] ]]
On 29 April 2010 oil began washing ashore in Plaquemines Parish, [[Louisiana]]; four weeks later local leaders still were begging [[President Obama]] for federal assistance in responding to the disaster which was overtaking hundreds of miles of shoreline.<ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/26/gulf.oil.spill.plaquemines/index.html Plaquemines Parish president blasts federal response to oil spill,] CNN, 26 May 2010.</ref>

Crude oil has washed into marshes, estuaries and onto beaches in [[Mississippi]] and [[Alabama]]. Wildlife has been killed and efforts are underway to save oil-coated
birds. Without capping the well [[Florida]]'s Everglades may be turned into a "dead zone." Scientists expect currents to carry the oil slick to the eastern seaboard of the [[United States]], fouling beaches and estuaries like the [[Chesapeake Bay]] and fishing grounds of the Grand Banks off [[Newfoundland]].

=== Silverfish ===

Most scientists agree that Corexit 9500 will have a much larger biological effect when it reaches coastal areas teeming with wildlife.<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref> Many species are being threatened at a crucial time in their life cycle.<ref>[http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2818588720100428 FACTBOX-Possible environmental impact of Gulf oil spill,] ''[[Reuters]]'', 28 April 2010.</ref> In testing done by the U.S. [[Environmental Protection Agency]] the dispersant Corexit 9500 was found to be extremely lethal to silverfish, a benchmark [[organism]] in [[toxic]]ity testing.<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>

=== Gulf menhaden ===

Gulf menhaden are a [[specie]]s harvested mostly for fish meal and fish oil. Menhaden could be badly affected
by the spill.

=== Coral, oyster and shrimp ===

Corals, oyster and shrimp likewise are critically affected. Richard Charter, a foremost expert on marine biology and oil spills who is a senior policy advisor for Marine Programmes for Defenders of Wildlife and is chairman of the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council has said, “There is a [[chemical]] [[toxic]]ity to the dispersant compound that in many ways is worse than oil,” which "in so doing you may be more seriously damaging the ecosystem offshore.”<ref>Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic. Retreived from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref> Shrimp were found to be extremely vulnerable to the lethal effects of the chemical dispersant Corexit 9500 used by [[Obama administration]] disaster relief agencies and BP in testing done by the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA).<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>

=== Brown pelican ===
[[File:Dead birds and sea turtles.jpg|right|325px|thumb|Dead birds and sea turtles. ]]
The [[Louisiana]] state bird, the Brown Pelican, was removed from protection under the U.S. Endangered Species Act in 2009. The Obama administration approved BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling rig without the proper environmental impact assessment (EIA) required by law. The disaster occurred just as breeding season commenced.

=== Other bird species ===

Other species endangered by the oil spill are American oystercatcher and Wilson's plover.

=== Sea turtles ===

As several species of sea turtles move through the Gulf during their spring nesting season, they need to surface to breathe.

=== Toxic oil spill rain ===
A report prepared by the [[Russia]]n Ministry of Natural Resources warned that the leaking [[crude oil]] into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] is about to become the worst [[environment]]al catastrophe in all of human history, threatening the entire eastern half of [[North America]] with “total destruction.” Russian scientists based the assessment on the use of millions of gallons of the government approved chemical dispersant Corexit.

The Russian scientists outlined that Corexit, with its 2.61ppm [[toxic]]ity level, combined with the seasonal warming of Gulf of Mexico waters, the [[molecule]]s will be able to “phase transition” from their present [[liquid]] to a gaseous state allowing them to be absorbed into clouds and released as “toxic rain” upon all of Eastern North America.

The scientists warned should a [[Hurricane Katrina]] like storm form in the Gulf while tens of millions of gallons of Corexit are floating on or near the surface, the resulting “toxic rain” falling upon the North American continent could “theoretically” destroy all microbial life to any depth it reaches resulting in an “unimaginable environmental catastrophe” destroying all kinds of life forms.<ref>[http://www.eutimes.net/2010/05/toxic-oil-spill-rains-warned-could-destroy-north-america/ Toxic oil spill rains warned could destroy North America,'] EUTimes, 24 May 2010. Retrieved 3 June 2010.</ref>

== The response ==

Initially [[Department of Homeland Security]] and the [[U.S. Coast Guard]] reported on 23 April 2010 there was no leak from the sunken oil rig.<ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-04-23-deepwater-horizon_N.htm Coast Guard: No oil leaking from sunken rig,] Rick Jervis, ''[[USA TODAY]]'', 23 April 2010.</ref> The next day the [[Obama administration]] officially estimated a leak from the sunken well at 1000 barrels per day.<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/24/oil-rig-deepwater-horizon_0_n_550849.html Oil Rig, Deepwater Horizon, Leaking Into Gulf Of Mexico,] Cain Burdeau, 4 April 2010. Retrieved from the ''[[Huffington Post]],'' 15 May 2010.</ref> The ''[[Associated Press]]'' reported it took nine days after the explosion and loss of life before President Obama made his first comments on the disaster.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100509/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_gulf_oil_spill_obama_s_response Obama oil response: aggressive as crisis unfolded,] ,H. Josef Hebert and Erica Werner, ''Associated Press'', 9 May 2010. Retrieved from news.yahoo.com 2 June 2010.</ref> BP's stock fell<ref>[http://in.reuters.com/article/idINLDE63S0HR20100429 European shares turn negative; BP falls,] ''Reuters'' 29 April 2010.</ref> on news of the "the worsening oil spill" and administration estimates were raised to 5000 barrels per day.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/29/us/29spill.html Size of Spill in Gulf of Mexico Is Larger Than Thought,] Campbell Robertson and Leslie Kaufman, ''New York Times,'' 28 April 2010. Retrieved 15 May 2010.</ref> and appointed a national incident commander.<ref>http://wallstcheatsheet.com/breaking-news/a-timeline-of-the-bp-oil-spill-crisis-pics/?p=10743/</ref>

=== U.S. Government dumps toxic dispersants into the Gulf of Mexico ===
[[File:Dispersants spraying.jpg|left|300px|thumb|Aerial image of the [[United States]] [[government]]'s dumping [[toxic]] disperants into the [[Gulf of Mexico]]. ]]
''Wired Science'' reports the [[Obama administration]] disaster-relief agencies are using a toxic chemical to disperse oil in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster. Use of dispersants are said to be a public relations strategy.<ref>[http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/05/gulf-dispersants/ Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative,] Brandon Keim, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from ''Wired Science'' 15 May 2010.</ref> Secretary [[Janet Napolitano]] of the [[Department of Homeland Security]] acknowledged<ref>[http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/ Obama: Oil spill bill on BP, Chem spray to save nature,] Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Updates, 04th May 2010. Retrieved from oilspillupdates.com 29 May 2010.</ref> the U.S government was dumping toxic chemicals from [[C-130]] cargo aircraft onto the spill.<ref>[http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2010-05-02/news/os-oil-disaster-chemical-cleanup-20100502_1_dispersant-spill-crude Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix,] Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref> Jackie Savitz of the ocean-conservation group Oceana stated the use of dispersants is only slightly less horrendous than the Gulf oil spill itself. "You're basically pouring chemicals into the ocean, which is never a good thing."<ref>Ibid.</ref> According to a 2009 [[Environmental Protection Agency]] report dispersants have not been used in the United State prior to the Obama administration's approval at BP'S request "because of possible long-term environmental effects, difficulties with timely and effective application, disagreement among [[scientist]]s and research data about their environmental effects, effectiveness, and [[toxic]]ity concerns" and the effects "are still unknown."<ref>Ibid.</ref> Residents in areas close to the oil spill have reported odors and symptoms such as [[headache]]s, dizziness, [[nausea]], eye irritation, and respiratory problems.<ref>[http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/gsolomon/gulf_oil_spill_air_quality_upd.html Gulf Oil Spill Air Quality,] Gina Solomon, 24 May 2010. Retrieved from Natural Resources Defense Council Staff Blog, 3 June 2010.</ref>

=== Disregard for worker safety ===
[[File:Cleaup300.jpg|right|275px|thumb|Cleanup workers exposed to the Obama adminsitration's decision to use known [[toxic]] substances to disperse the spill. Critics allege dispersants are ineffective and largely for cosmetic purposes. ]]
The ''[[Guardian (uk)]]'' has reported the controversy over Corexit exposes the [[Obama administration]] to criticism that its scientific agencies have been too accommodating to BP's strategy. In addition to the use of Corexit, the Obama [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA) came under fire for withholding test results on the toxicity of the water close to shore.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/20/gulf-oil-spill-chemical-dispersant</ref>

The dispersant 2-BE is known to cause heath dangers to clean up workers<ref>http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/gsolomon/oil_spill_clean-up_workers_get.html</ref> and wildlife alike.<ref>[http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2010/chem_dispersants_work_at_cost Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic.] Retrieved from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref> 2-BE has been documented to cause the breakdown of [[red blood cell]]s, leading to blood in urine and feces, and can damage the kidneys, liver, spleen and [[bone marrow]] of humans – effects not included on the information sheet for workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The dispersant Corexit 9500 is associated with headaches, vomiting and reproductive problems as sides effects to clean-up workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref> Lawrence Duffy of the University of Alaska claims dispersants "are more a public relations measure than a preventive one. It has an effect on our psychology because we don't see the oil slick,"<ref>Ibid.</ref> though oil particles continue to do damage.<ref>Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix, Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref>

=== Government mismanagement of relief efforts ===

Three weeks into the disaster [[National Public Radio]] reported the [[Obama administration]]'s official figures were still grossly underestimated<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126809525 Gulf Spill May Far Exceed Official Estimates,] Richard Harris, ''National Public Radio,'' 14 May 2010.</ref> and after the first month it was finally admitted the spill was nearly three times larger than earlier thought.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/us/28flow.html Estimates Suggest Spill Is Biggest in U.S. History,] Tom Zeller, Jr., ''New York Times'', 27 May 2010.</ref>

Federal officials did not begin burning the leaking oil off the surface of the water until one full week after the rig collapsed.<ref>[http://blog.al.com/live/2010/04/burning_should_have_started_a.html Burning should have started a week ago, former NOAA official says,] Ben Raines, ''Mobile Press-Register'', 29 April 2010.</ref> Louisiana Governor [[Bobby Jindal]] criticized [[President Obama]] for his slow response.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzEntQPr9OA</ref> ''The New York Times'' castigated the [[White House]] for delays and not moving quick enough, calling the evidence "damning" and declaring the Gulf oil spill a "huge disaster whose consequences might have been minimized with swifter action" from the [[Obama administration]].<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/01/opinion/01sat1.html Unanswered Questions on the Spill,] ''New York Times'' Editorial, 30 April 2010.</ref> One month into the spill, [[Democrat]]ic stalwarts [[James Carville]],<ref>[http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2521614/posts Is James Carville racist?], 26 May 2010. Retrieved from freerepublic.com 30 May 2010.</ref> [[Chris Matthews]],<ref>http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37632.html#ixzz0om46RhGH</ref> and Donna Brazile<ref>http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/99375-donna-brazile-calls-obamas-oil-spill-response-not-tough-enough</ref> criticized the inept and bungled response to the spreading catastrophe.
[[File:Finalisttransoce.jpeg|left|250px|thumb|Chris Oynes (left) of the Mineral Management Service presents Keelan Adamson (right) of Transocean the MMS's, ''Safety Award for Excellence'' (SAFE),<ref>http://www.mms.gov/awards/SAFEcriteria.htm</ref> at the MMS National Award luncheon, 7 May 2009.<ref>http://www.beaconmag.com/gomrigteamswinmm.html</ref> ''Source: Beacon magazine'']]
The [[White House]] lacked any type of plan to combat the disaster. [[U.S. House of Representatives|House]] Democratic Majority Leader [[Steny Hoyer]] publicly admitted that the [[Obama Administration]] was ill-prepared to deal with the situation. <ref>[http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2010/04/mms-thought-deepwater-horizon-was-awardwinningly-safe.html MMS Thought Deepwater Horizon was Award-Winningly SAFE,] The Project on Government Oversight, Exposing Government Corruption, 29 April 2010.</ref> While the disaster steadily grew, Obama did not discuss the crisis at length until he appeared at a photo op at Venice, Louisiana on 3 May 2010.<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126467960 Obama Says Oil Spill Damage Could Be Unprecedented,] Scott Horsley, [[NPR]], 3 May 2010.</ref> He would order a moratorium on all future deep sea oil platforms until they determine the problems associated with the current situation. As to be expected, Obama tries to remove himself from blame saying "the system failed", this despite the fact the he heads the system. Then he pointed fingers of blame at oil companies while taking an indirect jab at the Bush administration. <ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20005039-503544.html Angry Obama Seeks to Deflect Blame for Gulf Oil Spill Crisis, CBS, May 14, 2010]</ref>
{{cquote|For too long, for a decade or more, there has been a cozy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agency that permits them to drill. It seems as if permits were too often issued based on little more than assurances of safety from the oil companies. That cannot and will not happen anymore.}}
White House spokesman [[Robert Gibbs]] did his best to put a good spin on the disaster claiming the response was "comprehensive and fast." Meanwhile, the [[Democrat]]-led Congress ordered public hearings from oil executives. President Obama blamed others saying the answers from oil executives were a "ridiculous spectacle," "You had executives of BP and Transocean and Halliburton falling over each other to point the finger of blame at somebody else." <ref>[http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/burning_rig_of_fire_VkeuMCffwTUd9IBS7gUV7K?CMP=OTC-rss&FEEDNAME=#ixzz0oWm4u9zQ New look at Gulf oil spill as cleanup continues, NYPost, May 15, 2010]</ref> As the disaster progressed and questions arose over the government's misreporting and withholding<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/bp-feds-withheld-videos-showing-massive-scope-oil/story?id=10819367 BP and Feds Withheld Videos Showing Massive Scope of Oil Spill:] Coast Guard Told Public Not to 'Fixate' On Rate of Spill While Sitting On Video, Brian Ross, Matthew York, and Avni Patel, ABC News, 3 June 2010.</ref> of information from the [[public]] about the true dimensions of the calamity, the ''[[Associated Press]]'' noted,
{{cquote|First [Obama] was going to make BP pay for the Gulf oil mess. Then he declared himself in charge. Now he's trying to find out 'whose ass to kick' and making clear he'd fire BP's chief if only he could.<ref>http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100608/D9G7C5U00.html</ref>}}
[[File:Energy Tax bill.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Estimated impact of Obama Energy Tax in job losses. Total job loss: 2.2 million. ''Source: National Black Chamber of Commerce'' [http://www.nationalbcc.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=750:nbcc-study-generates-concerns-about-waxmanmarkey-climate-change-bill-costs-are-high-but-benefits-are-uncertain&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=7] ]]
=== Revitalizing cap and trade energy tax ===
:''Main article:'' '''[[Cap and trade]]'''
[[President Obama]] has been roundly criticized by [[Democrat]]s and [[Republican]]s alike for attempting to use the [[nation]]al tragedy to revitalized his failed Cap and Trade energy proposals. The Obama proposal, widely perceived as a job-killer tax increase, has stalled in the [[U.S. Senate]]. [[California]] Senator [[Dianne Feinstein]] has stated the climate bill "isn't going to stop the oil leak."<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/15/obamas-pitch-energy-speech-gulf-crisis-infuriates-republicans/ Obama Draws Bipartisan Criticism for Using Oil Spill to Push Energy Policy,] [[FOXNews]].com, 16 June 2010.</ref>

[[Environmentalist]]s want the President to push the program. Fred Krupp of the Environmental Defense Fund calls the opportunity "a political moment" to pass a carbon tax estimated to cost the average U.S. household $4300 per year.<ref>[http://blog.heritage.org/2009/05/15/the-4300-energy-tax/ The $4300 Energy Tax,] Nicolas Loris, 15 May 2009. Retrieved from Heritage.org, 19 June 2010.</ref>

Joel Benenson, who conducted polling for Obama’s presidential campaign, thinks the tax increase could pass, but wary Senate Democrats say otherwise. “There’s not a great call for it" said [[West Virginia]] Democratic Senator [[Jay Rockefeller]]. “It’s unrelated” to the immediate crisis in the Gulf noted Senator [[Ben Nelson]], Democrat from [[Nebraska]].<ref>[http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-16/democrats-say-climate-bill-lacks-momentum-after-spill-update3-.html Democrats Say Climate Bill Lacks Momentum After Spill,] Lisa Lerer and Simon Lomax, ''Bloomberg'', 16 June 2010. </ref>

=== Assistance of foreign governments ===
Nearly two-months after the disaster took place, the Obama administration decides to utilize the assistance offered by 17 countries, the U.N and the European Union. <ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/13/AR2010061304232.html After delays, [[U.S.]] begins to tap foreign aid for gulf oil spill, WaPo, June 14, 2010]</ref> International aid offers already accepted include two skimmers and 2.6 miles (4.2 kilometers) of boom from [[Mexico]], three sets of sweeping arm systems from the Netherlands and 1.86 miles (3.0 kilometers) of boom from Canada, the State Department said. The State Department noted that it has assisted BP in directly sourcing equipment and technical experts from around the world, including from Algeria, Australia, Bahrain, [[Brazil]], [[Canada]], China, Denmark, Latvia, Norway, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, and the [[United Kingdom]]. <ref>[http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/breakingnews/view/20100615-275709/US-taps-into-foreign-assistance-for-Gulf-oil-spill US taps into foreign assistance for Gulf oil spill, Agence France-Presse, June 15, 2010]</ref>

===Public relations offensive===
Faced with declining poll numbers and a public relations calamity, [[President Obama]] took to the airwaves nearly 60 days into the spill. A ''New York Times'' Op-ed commented,
{{cquote|All we got from President Obama was a vague call for some sort of new energy policy. Plus a Gulf Coast Restoration Plan, an oil spill study commission, a reminder that the secretary of energy won a Nobel Prize in physics and 17 references to God, prayer, blessings or faith.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/opinion/17collins.html The Boring Speech Policy,] Gail Collins, ''New York Times'' Op-ed, 16 June 2010.</ref><ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2010/06/17/behar-laments-shocking-bush-obama-garofalo-slams-anti-intellectual-pr Behar Panel Sees '[[Bush]]-Like' and '[[Corporatist]]' [[Obama]], [[Janeane Garofalo|Garofalo]] Slams 'Anti-Intellectual' [[Prayer]],] Joy Behar Show, [[CNN]]. Retrieved from newsbusters.org, 20 June 2010.</ref>}}
Former speechwriter for President [[Jimmy Carter]], [[Chris Matthews]], chided the President after his address to the nation,
{{cquote|Ludicrous that he keeps saying [Secretary of Energy] [[Steven Chu|Chu]] has a [[Nobel prize]]. I'll barf if he does it one more time.<ref>[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/06/15/msnbc_trashes_obamas_address_compared_to_carter_i_dont_sense_executive_command.html MSNBC Trashes Obama's Address: Compared To Carter, "I Don't Sense Executive Command,"]. Retrieved from RealClearPolitics.com, 20 June 2010.</ref>}}

==Economic impacts==
[[File:Oilslick.png|right|275px|thumb| Oil slick map as of May 30, 2010.]]
The economic impact of the [[Gulf of Mexico]] oil drilling disaster will be large and devastating to several key industries, including fishing, tourism, and transportation.<ref>[http://www.ihsglobalinsight.com/Perspective/PerspectiveDetail18638.htm Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Gulf Coast Oil Spill,] Nariman Behravesh, 4 May 2010. Retrieved from ihsglobalinsights.com 8 May 2020.</ref>

The top commercial species in terms of value are shrimp ($367 million), menhaden ($64 million), oysters ($59 million), and blue crab ($38 million).<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Fisheries Economics of the United States, Silver Spring, MD, 2008.</ref> As of 25 May 2010, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) closed 54,096 square miles to commercial and recreational fishing.<ref>http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/deepwater_horizon_oil_spill.htm</ref> These areas are some of the richest fishing grounds in the Gulf of Mexico for major commercial species such as white shrimp, blue crab, and oysters.

===Employment in fishing===
The most immediate economic impact of the oil spill has been on the Gulf fishing<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/video/asset/fishing-industry-hammered-by-gulf-oil-spill/41612D0E-B338-464D-A15E-5885B1D227D6</ref> industry. The number of [[job]]s at stake, which includes seafood processing and related wholesale and retail, is over 200,000 with related [[economic]] activity of $5.5 billion.<ref>[http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41262.pdf Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Selected Issues for Congress,] Curry L. Hagerty and Jonathan L. Ramseur, Congressional Research Service, 27 May 2010. (pdf p. 2.).</ref>

Dockside sales in [[Louisiana]] are approximately $660 million.<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Departtment of Commerce, [http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st5/publication/econ/2008/FEUS%202008%20ALL.pdf Fisheries Economics of the United States,] Silver Spring, MD, 2008. (pdf).</ref> Loses to the Louisiana fishing could be as high as $2.5 billion.<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/story/insurers-brace-for-liability-hit-from-oil-spill-2010-05-05</ref>

===Employment in tourism===

The tourist industry employs 620,000 people who earn over $9 billion in wages in the Gulf of Mexico region. Analysts say [[Florida]] alone could lose $3 billion in tourism.<ref>[http://www.royalgazette.com/rg/Article/article.jsp?articleId=7da532730030019&sectionId=65 Insurance industry concern grows over oil spill liability,] Alistair Barr, ''Royal Press Gazette'', 6 May 2010.</ref>

In 2008, recreational anglers took 25.4 million fishing trips and spent over $12 billion on equipment and trips in the Gulf region.<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Fisheries Economics of the United States, Silver Spring, MD, 2008.</ref> Some of the most popular recreational species include snappers, several types of drum, sheepshead, and Spanish mackerel. Recreational fisheries support businesses such as charters, bait and tackle, and services such as restaurants and hotels.

In 2000, 21.9 million people visited Gulf beaches and accounted for 177.2 million beach days.<ref>Brent Ache, David Bylsma, and Kristen Crossett, et al., The Gulf of Mexico at a Glance, National Ocean Service, NOAA, A Tool for the Gulf of Mexico Alliance and the American Public, Washington, DC, 2008. [http://gulfofmexicoalliance.org/pdfs/gulf_glance_1008.pdf pdf].</ref>

===Transportation===
The Offshore Marine Service Association (OMSA),<ref>[http://www.marinelog.com/DOCS/NEWSMMIX/2010jun00034.html OMSA slams offshore drilling moratorium,] 3 June 2010. Retrieved from Marinelog.com, 19 June 2010.</ref> the national trade association for U.S. flag vessels in the energy sector, criticized the [[Obama administration]]'s moratorium on offshore drilling projects. 100,000 jobs were immediately affected by the president's decision as companies began cancelling contracts to carry supplies, forcing layoffs. "The industry has struggled to climb out of a severe economic downturn. The moratorium threatens any hope of recovery and creates the potential for economic hardship that could last a decade or longer," remarked OMSA President Ken Wells.

OMSA estimates that for every mariner who works on-board a vessel, there are nine other Americans working in shore-side jobs that support vessel operations. Beyond the vessel crew, the negative consequences of the moratorium could impact everyone from service technicians supporting everything from diesel engines to the air condition systems to the local grocer who supplies food for the boat's galley.

Offshore vessels are a major part of the tax base in many coastal communities. Gulf Coast state and local government revenues will also decrease due to lower [[income tax]] and [[sales tax]] collections.

Disruption of shipping traffic in and out of the Port of [[New Orleans]] will impact barge, container, and tanker traffic in the Mississippi Delta and along the [[Mississippi River]]. Prices of all types of commodities would affected.

=== Insurance industry ===

BP, the operator on the oil drilling lease with a 65% stake, insured itself, rather than buying coverage from insurance companies. Industry analysts estimate total costs related to the oil spill cleanup and damages could exceed $14 billion. <ref>[http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKLDE6410IJ20100502 U.S. oil spill could bill could exceed $14 billion,] Tom Bergin, ''Reuters,'' 2 May 2010.</ref>

=== Lost revenue to state and local governments ===
:'''Louisiana'''
A Greater New Orleans study indicates the [[Obama administration]]'s moratorium could cost [[Louisiana]] as many as 22,000 jobs and more than $782 million in revenues.

With the average deepwater rig employing 230 workers with an average salary of $98,000, the study puts the tax revenue impact at $151 million if drilling were to resume within 18 months. Greater New Orleans President and CEO Michael Hecht says it’s difficult to be optimistic based on President Obama’s [[Oval Office]] address on 15 June 2010. President Obama's action “has the potential to turn an ecological tragedy into an economic calamity,” Hecht said.<ref>[http://neworleanscitybusiness.com/blog/2010/06/16/study-moratorium-could-cost-up-to-22000-jobs-782m-in-lost-revenue/ Study: Moratorium could cost up to 22,000 jobs, $782M in lost revenue,] Greg LaRose, ''New Orleans City Business'', 16 June 2010.</ref> The study foresees in a worse case scenario the loss of more than 22,000 jobs, 3,450 of them directly tied to the operating rigs and 18,945 with indirect ties such as catering firms and other companies that serve U.S energy producers.

Fearing that the drilling moratorium "could exacerbate, rather than alleviate, the impacts of this spill upon both our [[economy]] and our [[environment]]," U.S. Senator [[Mary Landrieu]] wrote to President Obama on 11 June 2010.<ref>http://landrieu.senate.gov/mediacenter/pressreleases/06-11-2010-1.cfm</ref> Landrieu stated,
{{Cquote|more than 300,000 Louisianians are employed either directly or indirectly by the oil and gas industry. ..The immediate impacts to the economy are devastating enough: idling the 33 rigs currently permitted to drill in the deepwater Gulf would immediately impact [[employment]] for roughly 38,000 crewmen, deck hands, engineers, welders, ROV operators, caterers, helicopter pilots, and others who operate and service these vessels. That's like closing 12 large motor vehicle assembly plants in one state, all at once.}}

Lost state and local tax revenues will accrue at a rate between $8 million and $15 million a month. Federal royalty losses will be substantial and a significant drop in tolls collected for the Louisiana Highway 1 bridge at Leeville, the main artery to the Port Fourchon energy port is projected as well.
:'''Texas'''
The [[Texas]] state comptroller’s office reported collection of $2.3 billion in oil and natural gas production taxes in fiscal year 2009 and $4.1 billion in 2008. The tax revenue is used to repair roads and fund schools, among other state services. Although no official analysis of President Obama's decision to place a moratorium on offshore production has been compiled yet, the Texas comptroller’s office said it’s unclear how much of an impact the president's decision will have on state services. Experts warn the president's decision could threaten tens of thousands of jobs in the [[Houston]] area.<ref>[http://www.kvue.com/news/state/Deepwater-drilling-moratorium-threatens-Texas-tax-revenue-95848579.html Deepwater drilling moratorium threatens Texas' tax revenue,] Gabe Gutierrez, 8 June 2010. Retrieved from kvue.com, 20 June 2010.</ref>
:'''Alabama'''
Manufacturing jobs in [[Alabama]] are at risk as a result of [[President Obama]]'s actions, as no new orders for equipment are coming in.<ref>[http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=94652 NOIA Member Cos Feel Drilling Moratorium Impacts,] National Ocean Industries Association, 11 June 2010.</ref>

=== Increased dependency on foreign oil ===

[[New Jersey]] Democrat Senator [[Robert Menendez]] proposed a ban on new offshore drilling permits and submitted a bill that would retroactively raise the financial liability of BP from $75 million to $10 billion. <ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/05/senator-menendez-on-oil-spill-no-new-drilling-permits.html Senator Menendez on Oil Spill: No New Drilling Permits, ABCNews, May 12, 2010]</ref> Oklahoma [[Republican]] Senator [[James Inhofe]] successfully killed the bill saying it would reduce competition and shut down smaller independent oil companies in favor of larger companies.

=== Too big to fail ===
An oil industry trade publication<ref>[http://oilprice.com/Environment/Oil-Spills/The-Cover-up-BP-s-Crude-Politics-and-the-Looming-Environmental-Mega-Disaster.html The Cover-up: BP's Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster,] Wayne Madsen, 06 May 2010. Retrieved from oilprice.com 6 June 2010.</ref> reports [[President Obama]] and senior White House staff, as well as Interior Secretary [[Ken Salazar]], are working with BP on [[legislation]] that would raise the cap on [[liability]] for damage claims from those affected by the oil disaster from $75 million to $10 billion. However the disaster has the real potential of costing nearly $1 trillion. Critics point out that in the deal between Obama and BP, $10 billion is a drop in the bucket for a trillion dollar disaster. Talk is noted in government circles, including [[FEMA]], of the need to nationalize BP in order to compensate those who will ultimately be affected by the worst oil disaster in the history of the world, and BP would, if its assets were nationalized, be credited with almost a trillion dollars for compensation purposes.<ref>[http://www.infowars.com/the-cover-up-bps-crude-politics-and-the-looming-environmental-mega-disaster-2/ The Cover-up: BP's Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster,] Wayne Madsen, 06 May 2010. Retrieved from infowars.com 6 June 2010.</ref><ref>[http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/31/why_obama_should_put_bp_under_temporary_receiversh/ Why Obama Should Put BP Under Temporary Receivership,] [[Obama_doublespeak#Change|Robert Reich]], 31 May 2010. Retrieved from talkingpointsmemo.com, 6 June 2010.</ref>

After Obama charged [[Attorney General]] [[Eric Holder]] to investigate the disaster, BP establish a $20 billion extrajudicial fund managed by an Obama appointee.<ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37574 Obama's Latest Shakedown,] David Limbaugh, ''Human Events'', 06/20/2010.</ref> Former [[CNN]] news writer and radio talk show host Mike Malloy suggested Holder is beholden to [[corporatist]] interests.<ref>[http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100603042451.aspx The AG vs. BP: Little Skepticism on ABC and NBC, While Lefty Talker Blasts Holder as 'Corporatist' Pretender], Rich Noyes, Media Research Center, 3 June 2010.</ref>

== Criticism of the Obama administration's handling of the disaster ==
[[File:Memorial for oil workers.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Memorial service for the 11 workers killed in the explosion. ''Reuters'' [http://www.daylife.com/photo/00nya1C9URdAy?q=Mississippi] ]]
Former top adviser to President [[Bill Clinton]], [[James Carville]], turned visibly emotional in a interview with [[George Stephanopoulos]] on [[ABC]]'s ''[[Good Morning America]]'' over [[President Barack Obama]]'s "lackadaisical" response to the Gulf oil spill disaster.
{{Cquote|The political [[stupid]]ity is unbelievable. ... The President of the United States could have come down here. He could have been involved with the families of these 11 people...... He could have implemented a plan in anticipation of this... He could be commandeering tankers and making BP bring tankers in and clean this up.... He could be deploying people to the coast. He could be with the corps of engineers and the Coast Guard with these people in Plaquemines Parish, doing something about these regulations. These people are crying. They're begging for something down here. And it just looks like he's not involved in this! Man, you have got to get down here and take control of this! Put somebody in charge of this and get this thing moving! We're about to die down here!<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/bp-oil-spill-political-headache-obama-democrats-slam/story?id=10746519 'Political Stupidity': Democrat James Carville Slams Obama's Response to BP Oil Spill; Democratic Strategist Said White House Should've Acted Quickly: 'We're About to Die Down Here',] Jake Tapper and Huma Khan, ''Good Morning America,'' 26 May 2010. Retrieved from abcnews.go.com 28 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0526/unhinged-carville-obama-gulf/ Unhinged Carville goes off on Obama on oil spill, The Raw Story, May 26, 2010]</ref><ref>http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasalert/2010/20100526121155.aspx</ref>}}
Carville also said in a separate interview on [[CNN]] with [[Anderson Cooper]],
{{Cquote|They are risking everything by this ‘go along with BP’ strategy they have. They seem, like, lackadaisical on this...they seem like they’re inconvenienced by this, this is some giant thing getting in their way and somehow or another, if you let BP handle it, it’ll all go away. It’s not going away. It’s growing out there. It is a disaster of the first magnitude...the government thinks that they are partnering with BP. I think they actually believe that BP has some kind of a good motivation here. That’s one of the, sort of, whole flaws is they're naïve.<ref>[http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1005/23/sotu.01.html State of the Union with Candy Crowley,] CNN, 23 May 2010. Retrieved 20 May 2010.</ref><ref>http://www.mediaite.com/tv/james-carville-obama-administration-seems-inconvenienced-by-bp-oil-spill/</ref>}}
Obama acknowledged the criticism days later in a televised press conference:
{{Cquote|Where I was wrong was in my belief that the oil companies had their act together when it came to worst-case scenarios.<ref>Remarks by President Obama on the Gulf Oil Spill, Office of the Press Secretary, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 29 May 2010.</ref>}}
[[File:Day12 comedyskit1.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Day 12 of the Disaster: Obama enjoys an evening of levity and banter with the Washington Press Corps at the White House Correspondent's Dinner.]]
[[MSNBC]] talk show host [[Chris Matthews]]<ref>Matthews said of Obama during the Potomac Primaries, "it's part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama's speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often." [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/13/chris-matthews-i-felt-thi_n_86449.html]</ref> said on [[Jay Leno]]'s ''Tonight Show'',
{{Cquote|The president scares me. He's been acting a little like a Vatican Observer here. When is he actually going to do something? And I worry. I know he doesn't want to take ownership of it. I know politics. He said the minute he says, 'I'm in charge,' he takes the blame.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100524/pl_ynews/ynews_pl2219 White House seeks to fend off growing chorus of critics on handling of Gulf spill,] ''Yahoo News'', 24 May 2010. Retrieved 30 May 2010.</ref>}}

[[Secretary of State]] [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]'s presidential campaign manager in 2008 questioned if [[Democratic]] primary [[voter]]s had
{{Cquote|underestimated the value of experience and crisis management as important attributes for their president.<ref>[http://topics.npr.org/article/04M3gpJa4p92Z?q=NPR Did 2008 Democratic primary voters underestimate value of experience?] Alex Pappas, ''The Daily Caller'', 06/06/10. Retrieved from npr.org, 6 June 2010.</ref>}}

Donna Brazile, who managed the presidential campaign of Democratic [[candidate]] [[Al Gore]] in 2000 said on [[ABC]]'s ''[[This Week]]'',
{{Cquote|One of the problems I have with the administration is that they're not tough enough. They are waiting for BP to say, ‘oh, we've got a new plan to stop the oil leak.’ They need to stop it, contain it, clean it up, and try to help us conserve our coastal wetlands.<ref>[http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/99375-donna-brazile-calls-obamas-oil-spill-response-not-tough-enough Donna Brazile calls Obama’s oil spill response ‘not tough enough’,] Ben Geman, ''The Hill'', 23 May 2010.</ref>}}

[[Dick Morris]], an intimate adviser to President [[Bill Clinton]] observed,
{{Cquote|these failings show that Obama is in over his head. But to the [[left]], which bleeds for each drop of water in the gulf and cries over every turtle or shrimp or sea bird, it is an unpardonable sin...Obama's incompetence and inexperience is causing [[liberal]]s to see him as arrogant, aloof, removed, conceited, suspicious of outside advice and even lazy...these character defects will haunt the president until 2012 and beyond.<ref>[http://townhall.com/columnists/DickMorrisandEileenMcGann/2010/06/19/dems_turn_on_obama?page=full&comments=true Dems Turn On Obama,] Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, 19 June 2010. Retrieved from Townhall.com 19 June 2010.</ref>}}

David Gergen worked in the [[Reagan]], [[George H.W. Bush]], and Clinton White House remarked,
{{Cquote|If our government had fought [[WWII]] like the way we’re fighting the oil spill, there’s a good chance many of us would be speaking [[German]] today.<ref>[http://www.ihatethemedia.com/david-gergen-rips-obama-oil-spill-response Another Democrat turns on Obama: David Gergen rips Obama’s oil spill response, Ihatethemedia.com, May 27, 2010]</ref>}}

[[Peggy Noonan]], a speech writer for President's Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, summed up public perceptions with,
{{Cquote|The president, in my view, continues to govern in a way that suggests he is chronically detached from the central and immediate concerns of his countrymen.... he has not, almost from the day he was inaugurated, been in sync with the [[Centrist|center]]....The American people have spent at least two years worrying that high government spending would, in the end, undo the republic. They saw the dollars gushing night and day...And now we have a videotape metaphor for all the public’s fears: the well gushing black oil into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] ...His philosophy is that it is appropriate for the federal government to occupy a more burly, significant and powerful place in America—confronting its problems of need, injustice, inequality. ... Then the oil spill came and government could not do the job, could not meet the need ...[[Hurricane Katrina|Katrina]] illustrate[d] that even though the federal government in our time has continually taken on new missions and responsibilities, the more it took on, the less it seemed capable of performing even its most essential jobs. [[Conservative]]s got this point—they know it without being told—but [[liberal]]s and [[progressive]]s did not. They thought Katrina was the result only of [[George W. Bush]]’s incompetence and conservatives’ failure to “believe in government.” But Mr. Obama was supposed to be competent....It’s not good to have a president in this position—weakened, polarizing and lacking broad public support—less than halfway through his term. That it is his fault is no comfort.<ref>[http://www.peggynoonan.com/article.php?article=524 He Was Supposed to Be Competent]: The spill is a disaster for the president and his political philosophy., Peggy Noonan, ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'', 29 May 2010.</ref>}}

''[[New York Times]]'' columnist [[Liberal_hate_speech#Against_the_disabled|Maureen Dowd]] wrote,
{{Cquote|Obama and top aides who believe in his [[divinity]] make a mistake to dismiss complaints of his aloofness as Washington white noise. He treats the press as a nuisance rather than examining his own inability to encapsulate Americans’ feelings.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/30/opinion/30dowd.html Once More, With Feeling,] Maureen Dowd, ''New York Time'' Op Ed, 29 mMay 2010.l</ref>}}

Actor Robert Redford demanded action from the [[Obama administration]]. The liberal special interest group [[Natural Resources Defense Council]] has Redford in a new ad decrying the lackluster response.<ref>[http://biggovernment.com/jmeath/2010/05/25/obamas-katrina-in-the-gulf/ Obama’s ‘Katrina’ in the Gulf, BigGovernment.com, May 25, 2010]</ref> Redford made an appearance on MSNBC and said there is no one manning this ship,
{{Cquote|In this case, we don’t need a disaster manager, we need a leader.}}

[[Hollywood values|Liberal Hollywood]] director [[James Cameron]] says;
{{cquote|Over the last few weeks I've watched, as we all have, with growing horror and heartache, watching what's happening in the Gulf and thinking those morons don't know what they're doing. <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/cameron-titanic-spill-morons/2010/06/03/id/361007 'Titanic' Director Cameron: 'Morons' Directing Spill Efforts, NewsMax, June, 2010]</ref>}}

Obnoxious Hollywood liberal [[Rosie O'Donnell]] said, "We broke the womb of freaking mother Earth." <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2010/06/08/rosie-odonnell-wants-bps-assets-seized-we-broke-freakin-womb-mother-eart Rosie O'Donnell Wants BP's Assets Seized, NewsBusters.org, June 8, 2010]</ref> In addition, O'Donnell accused BP of
{{cquote|willful homicide, willful mass murder" and demanded BP be nationalized immediately: "I say seize their assets. Right now. Seize their assets today. Take over the company.}}

===Foreign reaction===
Relations between allies the [[U.K.]] and U.S. are now at historic lows thanks to Barack Obama's mishandling of the oil spill. Britain had been repeatedly mocked by Obama prior to the spill<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/mar/06/obama-dvd-brown Obama's DVD gift to Brown - it's the thought that counts,] ''Guardian UK,'' March 6, 2009.</ref> <ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4623148/Barack-Obama-sends-bust-of-Winston-Churchill-on-its-way-back-to-Britain.html Barack Obama sends bust of Winston Churchill on its way back to Britain,] ''Telegraph UK,'' February 14, 2009.</ref> <ref>[http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/03/obama_disses_brit_pm.html Obama disses Brit PM, American Thinker,] March 5, 2009.</ref> but now find themselves subjected to endless [[propaganda]]. Prominent foreign dignitaries have expressed the public's growing frustration with the administration's posturing and hunt for scapegoats. The mayor of London, Boris Johnson, who supported Obama in 2008, decried "anti-British rhetoric, buck-passing and name-calling" while Lord Tebbit branded Mr Obama's conduct “despicable” and the president's rhetoric
{{cquote|a crude, [[bigot]]ed, [[xenophobic]] display of [[partisan]] political Presidential petulance."<ref>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1285467/BP-OIL-SPILL-Lord-Tebbit-Boris-Johnson-attack-Obamas-anti-British-rhetoric.html#ixzz0rK7zthtN</ref><ref>[http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23843524-boris-johnson-tells-barack-obama-stop-bashing-britain.do Boris Johnson tells Barack Obama: Stop bashing Britain,] London Evening Standard, June 6, 2010.</ref>}}
The atmosphere Obama created in Britain is so toxic that the British press has labelled Barack Obama the most unpopular man in England. <ref>[http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/06/17/2010-06-17_president_barack_obama_is_the_most_hated_man_in_england_says_british_reporter.html Barack Obama: the most unpopular man in Britain?,] Telegraph UK, June 17, 2010.</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|3}}

[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Disasters]]
[[Category: Environment]]

==External Links==
* [http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23oilspill Twitter Feed: #Oilspill (warning vulgar comments left)]
* [http://www.bp.com/bodycopyarticle.do?categoryId=1&contentId=7052055&nicam=USCSBaselineCrisis&nisrc=Google&nigrp=Non_Branded Official BP Global Oil Spill News Website]
* [http://dailybail.com/slideshows/bp-disaster-dying-birds/5613601 Photos of Gulf birds covered in oil]

Democratic Party

2010-08-06T20:02:17Z

ChrisGT90:

{{AmericanPoliticalParty
| party_name=Democratic Party
| party_articletitle = Democratic Party (United States)
| party_logo = [[Image:democraticpartyusalogo.png|200px]]
| website = [http://www.democrats.org www.democrats.org]
| headquarters = 430 South Capitol Street SE [[Washington, D.C.]] 20003
| chairman = [[Tim Kaine]]
| houseleader = [[Nancy Pelosi]]
| senateleader = [[Harry Reid]]
| foundation = 1832
| ideology = range from liberal to moderate
| fiscalpolicy = [[Socialist]]/[[Liberal]]
| socialpolicy = center-liberal
| colors = Blue (unofficial)
| footnotes =
}}
The '''Democratic Party''' is one of the two major political [[parties]] in the [[United States of America]]. It is the [[pro-abortion]], higher taxes party, while the [[Republican Party]] is the [[pro-life]], lower taxes party. President [[Barack Obama]] and other Democrats are generally [[liberal]].

Members of the Democratic Party are known as Democrats. In the 19th century the party was sometimes called "The Democracy." Today Republicans sometimes call it the "[[Democrat Party]]" as a term of ridicule. There are Democrats who claim to be more [[conservative]] than typical liberals, called the "[[Blue Dogs]]" in [[Congress]], but they often behave like "lapdogs" for the [[liberal]] party leadership when there is a controversial vote.

In the doldrums after 2000, the party roared back with major gains in 2006, which it expanded in 2008 to sweep control of the national government, and leave the GOP in a state of confusion and decline. The GOP bounced back in 2009, with near-unanimous opposition to contentions Democratic policies, especially as stimulus spending and health care reform. Polls show Obama's popularity began to sink in the summer of 2009.

The Democrats currently control the White House and have decisive majorities in the [[111th United States Congress]], together with the majority of state governorships and legislatures and control most large cities as well, while suburbs and rural areas are more likely to be in republican hands.<ref>[http://www.multistate.com/Site.nsf/Elections2006PostMaps?OpenPage Multistate.com] Post-Election 2006 Maps</ref> Polls show 50% of voters identify themselves with the Democratic Party as opposed to 35% for the Republican Party.<ref>[http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=312 Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007] Pew Research Center, 22 March 2007</ref> The Democratic-majority Congress currently has a 55% negative approval rating, with only 31% expressing approval.<ref> [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/congressional_job_approval-903.html]</ref>

==Policies and criticism==
The views of individual Democrats sometimes diverge from the party's official stance as expressed in its national platform, however unlike the Republican party, the Democratic National Committee has not allowed dissenting opinions to share the podium on matters such as abortion at National Conventions. <ref>[http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_03/005787.php] , http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_03/005787.php, March 6, 2005</ref>

===Economic policy===
[[Image:Unemployment.jpg|thumb|241px|right|''Source: Bureau of Labor Statisitcs'' [http://astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2009/07/anti-stimulus-in-pictures-any-questions.html]]]
In the field of economic policy, Democrats tend to favor high progressive taxes, more regulation, and higher government spending.

The Democratic Party has historically had ties to [[labor union|organized labor]].<ref> http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/913wopoz.asp Paying Dues - The Democrats settle up with their union bosses, [[Weekly Standard]], July 25, 2007 </ref>

The [[National Education Association]],<ref>[http://www.nea.org/index.html National Education Association homepage]</ref> the largest union of public school teachers, is a backbone of the party, supplying the largest number of delegates to its national conventions.

Democrats typically state that they want to help low-income Americans, however they usually seek to accomplish this by increasing the tax burden on the wealthiest Americans.

Since passage of the Economic Recovery Act of 2009, [[unemployment]] has increased from below 7% to slightly under 10%.

===Foreign and military policy===
According to its platform, the Democratic Party has the objective of strengthening America. Democratic national leadership has been accused of being ambivalent about terrorism<ref>[http://www.news10.net/display_story.aspx?storyid=22045 "Democrats, ACLU Outraged Over Traveler Terrorism Screening Program"] C. Johnson, Associated Press</ref> and insufficiently patriotic.<ref>[http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0112/01/smn.19.html CNN Saturday Morning News]Transcript: December 1, 2001 </ref> A poll conducted by [[Fox News]] released in October 2007 found that 1 in 5 Democrats – nearly 10 million voters – think the world will be better off if the [[United States]] were to lose the [[War in Iraq]].<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,299374,00.html Nearly 1 in 5 Democrats Say World Will Be Better Off if U.S. Loses War], FOX News Poll, October 04, 2007.</ref> The poll found this sentiment 3 to 4 times higher among Democrats than among moderate, centrist, and Republican voters.

===Education===
An organization affiliated with the [[Democratic Leadership Council]] called the [[Progressive Policy Institute]] claims a long-standing opposition to school vouchers.<ref>21st Century Schools Project Bulletin: Special Edition [http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=110&subsecID=900001&contentID=250630 ''Putting Vouchers in Perspective''], PPI E-newsletter 2 July 2002</ref> Jonathan Alter of ''Newsweek'' warned that opposition to vouchers might alienate some traditional Democratic voting blocs:
:"Can wealthy white liberals - many of whom send their kids to private school - really say to poor parents: 'We can have choices, but you must not?'...This is a glaring hypocrisy sitting at the heart of the liberal opposition to targeted vouchers… Right now, Democrats are in a highly compromised position on education."<ref>[http://www.edreform.com/index.cfm?fuseAction=newsLetter&sectionID=29&NLissueID=4&articleID=11&altCol=2 Center For Education Reform, Monthly Letter to Friends No. 75], Back to School 2002.</ref>

===Environment vs Labor===
Two other important coalition groups also find themselves in direct conflict with each other within the Democratic party coalition--[[Environmentalist]]s and Labor Unions. While environmentalists support efforts like clean air and alternative fuels, for example, this creates tension with the workers of American automobile manufactures whose jobs are threatened by environmental policies such as increasing regulations and high costs. Such policies can lead to cutbacks and layoffs. Balancing these issues is difficult because some sacrifices of interests must be made by both sides.

===Healthcare===
Democratic leaders have endorsed various [[Democratic Health Care Plans]]; the question in 2009 is whether a new trillion dollar plan can pass in a time of economic crisis.

Therefore, many argue that there may be some advantages to a universal health care system. Democrats generally regard [[universal health care]] to be a priority because of the appeal to poorer voters without any kind of [[health insurance]].

===Gay Rights===
White Democratic leaders --but not blacks or Latinos--consistently favor measures such as the establishment of [[same-sex civil union]]s. They mostly reject [[gay marriage]].

===Other Policies===
Democrats frequently support the minimum wage, workplace protections, the right of women to choose to have an [[abortion]], [[gun control]], gay marriage, and the separation of church and state.

==Religion==
In the United States, there is some correlation between religious and political affiliation, though people of all faiths and denominations can be found among the supporters of each of the main parties.

Historically [[Roman Catholic Church|Catholic]] voters have had a tendency to identify with the Democratic Party; in recent decades there has been little difference. However Catholic politicians are mostly Democrats, including Speaker of the House [[Nancy Pelosi]] and Massachusetts Senator [[Ted Kennedy]]. However, several general ideals of the Democratic Party's platform - most notably, the party's overall support for the legality of [[abortion]] - are contrary to the position of the [[Catholic Church]].

With regard to Protestants, members of [[Evangelical]] churches in recent years have voted about 70-80% Republican. However, the large majority of Democratic Party members are Protestants. One unusual feature of the Democratic Party, however, is that it draws substantial support both from committed African-American Protestants (most of whom are Baptists) and from secular and atheist voters. The strong opposition to [[homosexuality]] found among many Black Protestants contrasts strikingly with the support frequently shown by other Democrats for the [[homosexual agenda]]. One reason for this contrast could be the Democrats' strong support for minority rights.

Democrats also generally believe that religion should be separate from public life, and as such are typically supported by the ACLU. For example, in 1999 the Congress took up a bill to protect the display of the [[Ten Commandments]]. In the House of Representatives, over 3/4ths of the Democratic party members voted to remove the display.<ref>http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/06/18/gun.rollcall/ten.commandments.html</ref>. The measure did not pass the Legislature, and as a result when Justice [[Roy Moore]] posted a [[Ten Commandments]] display in his courthouse, the ACLU was able to have the display removed.

==History==
[[File:Dem-leaders.jpg|thumb|300px|Clockwise from far left: presidents Carter, Kennedy, Clinton, Wilson, Johnson, Truman, Jackson, Roosevelt]]
===First Party System===
Democrats claim the [[Thomas Jefferson]] founded their party in 1793 at the start of the [[First Party System]]. The [[Democratic-Republican Party]] was a political party established during the 1790's under the leadership of Thomas Jefferson and [[James Madison]]. It was generally called the Republican Party, but it had no relation to today's Republican Party, founded in 1854. By about 1816, the Federalist Party had broken up as a national organization. With its decline, the Democratic-Republican Party split into several groups. [[Andrew Jackson]] emerged as the candidate of one of these groups and was elected President in 1828.

===Origins===
Most historians regard Jackson's 1832 campaign organization as the beginning of today's Democratic Party. The Democratic Party itself traces its origin to Jefferson's Democratic-Republican Party.<ref>[[World Book]]</ref> A few Democratic-Republicans, such as [[John Quincy Adams]] and [[Henry Clay]], created the [[National Republican Party]]. Adams supporters called themselves National Republicans, antecedents of the Whig and later the Republican parties.<ref>William DeGregorio, ''The Complete Book of U.S. Presidents'', Gramercy 1997</ref>

The modern Democratic party was formed during 1828-34, under the national leadership of Jackson and Van Buren, with organizations in all the states comprised of local political leaders. This became the era of [[Jacksonian Democracy]]. The Jacksonians resembled the [[Jeffersonian Democracy|Jeffersonians]] especially in terms of anti-elite rhetoric of opposition to "aristocracy" (that is, wealthy old families), distrust of banks (and paper money), and faith in "the people." By his extensive use of federal [[Spoils system|patronage]], President Jackson removed old office-holders to make way for party loyalists. With the emergence of the Whig Party, the nation now had a new party system, the [[Second Party System]], which lasted until 1854.

The party held its first national convention in 1832 to choose a new running mate for Jackson; it nominated Martin Van Buren for vice president and endorsed the reelection of Jackson. Jackson easily defeated Clay in 1832. In the political realignment of 1828-32, some of Jackson's supporters from the election of 1828, especially businessmen and bankers, switched to the opposition Whig Party as Jackson crusaded against the [[Second Bank of the United States]]. The name "Democratic Party" became common by the mid-1830s.

== Jacksonian Democracy: 1832-1854 ==
[[image:donk1837.jpg|thumb|300px|1837 cartoon shows Democratic Party as donkey ]]
The new party dominated the [[Second Party System]] (as political scientists call it; historians call it "Jacksonian Democracy", 1832-54. After 1832, the Democratic Party drew support from a cross section of the country; every group was represented. However the vast majority of rich merchants, bankers and plantation owners were Whigs, as were most evangelical Protestants. The party was strongest among traditionalistic farmers, frontiersmen, unskilled workers, Irish Catholics, and local or state political leaders. It was weakest in [[New England]], where industrialization turned most factory workers and white collar workers into Whigs, but was dominant in all other regions. The key issues it promoted were opposition to elites and aristocrats, popular democracy (in terms of voting rights and access to government patronage jobs) and opposition to the [[Bank of the United States]] (Jackson vetoed its charter renewal in 1832). The policies were known as [[Jacksonian Democracy]]. [[Image:Jackson1832.jpg|thumb|300px|left]]

Banking and tariffs were the central domestic policy issues from 1828 to 1852. The Democrats favored the [[Mexican-American War]]; Whigs opposed it. Democrats attracted Catholic Irish and German immigrants and denounced anti-immigrant nativism. Both the Democrats and Whigs were divided on the issue of slavery.

In the 1830s the [[Loco-Focos]] in New York City were radically democratic, anti-monopoly, and proponents of [[laissez-faire]]. Their chief spokesman was writer [[William Leggett]]. At this time labor unions were few; some were loosely affiliated with the party.

The economy went sour in the late 1830s with Van Buren getting the blame; he lost reelection as president in 1840 to the Whig [[William Henry Harrison]]. The Democrats gained the White House back in 1844 with [[James K. Polk]]. He had a successful term, then retired. The Democratic National Committee was created in 1848 at the convention that nominated General [[Lewis Cass]], who lost to General [[Zachary Taylor]] of the Whigs. In state after state the Democrats gained small but permanent advantages over the Whigs, until by 1852 the Whig Party was fatally weakened by divisions regarding the issue of slavery and they soon vanished.

The Democratic party dominated the North from the 1840s to 1854. Northern Democrats opposed banks, criticized corporate practices, and preached the ideals of a free society. They called for rapid territorial expansion of the United States, saying that in territorial expansion lay a means for thwarting the pretensions of the [[Slave Power]].

[[Franklin Pierce]] of New Hampshire was elected president in 1852, followed by [[James Buchanan]] of Pennsylvania in 1856. They proved poor presidents who lost control of the slavery issue, and the party, as the nation broke apart and fought the [[American Civil War]].

==Third Party System: Civil War, Gilded Age: 1854-1896==
During the [[Third Party System]] (1854-1896) the Democrats became the minority in the face of the newly formed Republican Party, which controlled nearly all northern states by 1860, bringing a solid majority in the Electoral College. A powerful Republican issue was the allegation that northern Democrats, including "Doughfaces" like Pierce and Buchanan, and advocates of popular sovereignty like [[Stephen A. Douglas]] and [[Lewis Cass]], were accomplices to the [[Slave Power]]. The Republicans meant by Slave Power the conspiracy of slaveholders to seize control of the federal government and block the progress of liberty.

[[Image:DEM1860.JPG|200px|thumb|left|To vote for Douglas in Virginia, a man had to deposit the ticket in the official ballot box.]]
In 1860 the Democrats were unable to stop the election of Republican [[Abraham Lincoln]], even as they feared his election would lead to civil war. The party split in two. The northern wing nominated Douglas, and the southern wing nominated Vice President [[John C. Breckinridge]]. Douglas campaigned across the country and came in second in the popular vote, but carried only Missouri. Breckinridge carried 11 slave states.

The Republican Party was beginning a 50-year era of dominance (1858-1910). During the war, Northern Democrats divided into two factions, [[War Democrats]], who supported the military policies of President Lincoln, and [[Copperheads]], who strongly opposed them. Historian Kenneth Stampp has captured the Copperhead spirit in his depiction of Democratic Congressman [[Daniel W. Voorhees]] of Indiana:
<blockquote>There was an earthy quality in Voorhees, "the tall sycamore of the Wabash." On the stump his hot temper, passionate partisanship, and stirring eloquence made an irresistible appeal to the western Democracy. His bitter cries against protective tariffs and national banks, his intense race prejudice, his suspicion of the eastern Yankee, his devotion to personal liberty, his defense of the Constitution and state rights faithfully reflected the views of his constituents. Like other Jacksonian agrarians he resented the political and economic revolution then in progress. Voorhees idealized a way of life which he thought was being destroyed by the current rulers of his country. His bold protests against these dangerous trends made him the idol of the Democracy of the Wabash Valley.<ref>Stampp, 211.</ref></blockquote>

The Democrats lost consecutive presidential elections from 1860 through 1880 (but 1876 was in dispute); 1884 was their next victory. The Democrats were weakened by their record of opposition to the Civil War but nevertheless benefited from white Southerners' resentment of Reconstruction and consequent hostility to the Republican Party. The [[Redeemers]] gave the Democrats control of every Southern state; the disenfranchisement of black voters in most of the South took place 1890-1900. From 1880 to 1960 the "[[Solid South]]" voted Democratic in all presidential elections (except 1928). After 1900 the key election in southern states was the Democratic primary; victory in the that primary was "tantamount to election" because the GOP was so weak.

Though Republicans continued to control the White House until 1912 (except 1884 and 1892), the Democrats remained competitive in the states, especially in the mid-Atlantic and lower Midwest, and controlled the House of Representatives for most of that period. In the election of 1884, [[Grover Cleveland]], the conservative Democratic Governor of New York, won the presidency, a feat he repeated in 1892, having lost in the election of 1888.

[[Image:1893cleveland-typewriter.jpg|thumb|350px|Typewriters were new in 1893 and this Gillam cartoon from ''Puck'' shows that Cleveland can't get the Democratic "machine" to work as the keys (key politicians) won't respond to his efforts.]]

Cleveland was the leader of the [[Bourbon Democrats]], the conservative wing of the party. They represented business interests, supported banking and railroad goals, promoted capitalism, opposed imperialism and U.S. verseas expansion, opposed the annexation of [[Hawaii]], fought for the [[gold standard]], and opposed [[Bimetallism]]. They strongly supported reform movements such as [[Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act|Civil Service Reform]] and opposed corruption of city bosses, leading the fight against the [[Tweed Ring]]. The leading Bourbons included [[Samuel J. Tilden]], [[David Bennett Hill]] and [[William C. Whitney]] of New York, [[Arthur Pue Gorman]] of Maryland, [[Thomas F. Bayard]] of Delaware, [[William L. Wilson]] of West Virginia, [[John Griffin Carlisle]] of Kentucky, [[William F. Vilas]] of Wisconsin, [[J. Sterling Morton]] of Nebraska, [[John M. Palmer]] of Illinois, [[Horace Boies]] of Iowa, [[L.Q.C. Lamar]] of Mississippi, and railroad builder [[James J. Hill]] of Minnesota. A prominent intellectual was [[Woodrow Wilson]]. The Bourbons were in power when the [[Panic of 1893]] hit; it was a deep depression and they took the blame. A fierce struggle inside the party ensued, with catastrophic losses for both the Bourbon and agrarian factions in 1894, leading to the showdown in 1896.
[[Image:Dead-dem1880.jpg|thumb|550px|In 1880 when General Hancock (right) became the presidential nominee of the Democrats, Republican cartoonists showed the Democratic party history as a horror chamber featuring atrocities in the Civil War era; the donkey" shows the party as a coalition of the rear end of the South joned to the rear end of the North]]

===Ethnocultural voting: pietistic Republicans versus liturgical Democrats===
Religious lines were sharply drawn.<ref>Kleppner (1979).</ref> Methodists, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Scandinavian Lutherans and other pietists and evangelicals in the North were tightly linked to the Republican Party. In sharp contrast, liturgical groups, especially the Catholics, Episcopalians, and German Lutherans, looked to the Democratic Party for protection from pietistic moralism, especially prohibition. Both parties cut across the class structure, with the Democrats more bottom-heavy.

Cultural issues, especially prohibition and foreign language schools became important because of the sharp religious divisions in the electorate. In the North, about 50% of the voters were pietistic or evangelical Protestants who believed the government should be used to reduce social sins, such as drinking. Liturgical churches (Roman Catholics, German Lutherans, Episcopalians) comprised over a quarter of the vote and wanted the government to stay out of the morality business. Prohibition debates and referenda heated up politics in most states over a period of decade, as national prohibition was finally passed in 1918 (and repealed in 1933), serving as a major issue in the North between the wet Democracy and the dry GOP.<ref>In the South the Democrats were mostly on the dry side. Kleppner (1979).</ref>

==The Bryan Movement==
[[Image:Mark Hanna 1896 election.jpg|thumb|290px|right|Democratic attack ad in 1896 against GOP National Chairman [[Mark Hanna]]; cartoon by Davenport depicts Hanna as a slave driver; from Hearst's ''New York Journal'']]
[[Grover Cleveland]] led the conservative, pro-business [[Bourbon Democrat]]s but as the [[Panic of 1893|depression of 1893]] deepened his enemies multiplied. The Panic of 1893 started in February 1893, a full month before Cleveland became president. Convinced that the [[Sherman Silver Purchase Act]], passed under the administration of [[Benjamin Harrison]], was largely responsible for the alarming drain on federal gold, President Cleveland called Congress into special session to urge its repeal. Congress consented, but only after bitter debate that divided the Democratic party into two hostile camps-the eastern "goldbugs" and the silver wing of the West and South that was to propel young [[William Jennings Bryan]] to the fore in 1896.<ref>William DeGregorio, ''The Complete Book of U.S. Presidents'', Gramercy 1997</ref> At the 1896 convention the silverite-agrarian faction repudiated the president, and nominated the crusading orator [[William Jennings Bryan]] on a platform of inflation through "free" silver. The idea was that minting huge numbers of silver dollars would flood the economy with cash and end the depression. Eastern Democrats, unable to accept the party's free-silver platform and unwilling to support McKinley for his tariff views, nominated their own candidate, John M. Palmer of Illinois and called themselves the National, or Gold, Democrats.<ref>William DeGregorio, ''The Complete Book of U.S. Presidents'', Gramercy 1997</ref> The [[Gold Democrats]] attracted politicians and intellectuals (including [[Woodrow Wilson]] and [[Frederick Jackson Turner]]) who refused to vote Republican.

Bryan, an overnight sensation because of his phenomenal "Cross of Gold" speech, crusaded against the gold standard. Crisscrossing the Midwest and East by special train, he gave over 500 speeches to audiences in the millions. In St. Louis he gave 36 speeches to workingmen's audiences all over the city, all in one day. Most Democratic newspapers were hostile (except [[William Randolph Hearst]]'s ''New York Journal'') but Bryan seized control of the media by making the news every day, as he hurled thunderbolts against Eastern monied interests. The rural folk in South and Midwest were ecstatic, showing an enthusiasm never before seen. Ethnic Democrats, especially Germans, however, were alarmed and frightened by Bryan. The middle classes, businessmen, newspaper editors, factory workers, railroad workers, and prosperous farmers generally rejected Bryan's crusade. Bryan was overwhelmed by [[William McKinley]] in the most exciting race in national history.<ref> Refuting Bryan's charges, historians have discovered there was little coercion of workers.</ref> McKinley promised a return to prosperity based on the gold standard, support for industry, railroads and banks, and pluralism that would enable every group to move ahead. Bryan did however, win the hearts and minds of a majority of Democrats. The election of 1896 was a political realignment. The victory of the Republican Party marked the start of the "Progressive Era," from 1896 to 1932, in which the GOP usually was dominant.

==Fourth Party System: Bryan, Wilson, Progressivism: 1896-1932 ==
The [[Fourth Party System]] began with the 1896 election, a realignment during which the GOP controlled the presidency for 28 of 36 years. The GOP dominated most of the Northeast and Midwest, and half the West. Bryan, with a base in the South and Plains states, was strong enough to get the nomination in 1900 (losing to McKinley) and 1908 (losing to Taft). [[Theodore Roosevelt]] dominated the first decade of the century—and to the annoyance of Democrats "stole" the trust issue by crusading against trusts.

[[Image:Steal~trust.JPG|thumb|250px|[[Theodore Roosevelt]] steals the anti-trust issue from the Democrats, 1904]]

Anti-Bryan conservatives controlled the convention in 1904, but they faced a [[Theodore Roosevelt]] landslide. Bryan dropped his free silver and anti-imperialism rhetoric and supported mainstream progressive issues, such as the income tax, anti-trust, and direct election of Senators. He backed [[Woodrow Wilson]] in 1912, was rewarded with the State Department, then resigned in protest against Wilson's non-pacifistic policies in 1916. Northern Democrats were progressive on most issues, but generally opposed prohibition, were lukewarm regarding woman's suffrage, and were reluctant to undercut the "boss system" in the big cities.

Taking advantage of a deep split in the GOP, the Democrats took control of the House in 1910, and elected the intellectual reformer [[Woodrow Wilson]] in 1912 and 1916. Wilson successfully led Congress to a series of Progressive laws, including a reduced tariff, stronger antitrust laws, the [[Federal Reserve System]], hours-and-pay benefits for railroad workers, and outlawing of child labor (which was reversed by the Supreme Court). Furthermore, constitutional amendments for prohibition and woman suffrage were passed in his second term. In effect, Wilson laid to rest the issues of tariffs, money and antitrust that had dominated politics for 40 years. Wilson led the U.S. to victory in the World War, and turned his attention to foreign affairs. He wrote parts of the [[Versailles Treaty]], especially the new [[League of Nations]]. But in 1919 Wilson's political skills faltered, and suddenly everything turned sour. The Senate rejected Versailles and the League, a nationwide wave of strikes and violence caused unrest, and Wilson's health collapsed. The GOP came roaring back in a landslide in 1920, as [[Warren G. Harding]] defeated a Democratic ticket memorable for having [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] as the vice presidential nominee.

[[Image:D-Edge-Congress.JPG|thumb|300px|Before 1932 Republicans usually controlled Congress; after 1932 the Democrats usually were in control]]

At the 1924 Democratic National Convention, the big fight was over a resolution denouncing by name the [[Ku Klux Klan]]; it was pushed by New York governor [[Al Smith]] and Alabama Senator [[Oscar W. Underwood]] in order to embarrass the front-runner, [[William McAdoo]] of California. After furious debate, the resolution failed by just a single vote. The KKK faded away soon after, but the deep split in the party over cultural issues, especially Prohibition, facilitated Republican landslides in 1920, 1924 and 1928. However [[Al Smith]] did build a strong Catholic base in the big cities in 1928, and [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]]'s election as Governor of New York that year brought a new leader to center stage.

== Fifth Party System: The New Deal ==
[[Image:509px-FDR in 1933.jpg|thumb|left|180px|President [[Franklin Delano Roosevelt]] (1933-1945)]]
The [[Wall Street Crash 1929|stock market crash of 1929]] and the ensuing [[Great Depression]] set the stage for a more progressive government and [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] won a [[landslide victory]] in the [[U.S. presidential election, 1932|election of 1932]], campaigning on a platform of "Relief, Recovery, and Reform." This came to be termed "[[New Deal|The New Deal]]" after a phrase in his acceptance speech. The Democrats also swept to large majorities in both houses of Congress, and among state Governors. Roosevelt altered the nature of the Party, away from laissez-faire capitalism, and towards an ideology of economic regulation and insurance against hardship. Conservative Democrats were outraged; led by [[Al Smith]] they formed the [[American Liberty League]] in 1934 and counterattacked. They failed and either retired from politics or joined the GOP. A few of them, such as [[Dean Acheson]] found their way back to the Democratic Party.

After making gains in Congress in 1934 Roosevelt moved left and embarked on an ambitious legislative program called "The Second New Deal." It was characterized by building up labor unions, nationalizing welfare by the [[WPA]] (which 2 million employed unemployed men), setting up [[Social Security]] and raising taxes on business profits.<ref> In general the New Deal, 1933-40, did not raise taxes, except for the Social Security tax that went into effect in 1937.</ref>

Roosevelt's [[New Deal]] programs focused on job creation through public works projects as well as Social Security. In the name of "reform" it imposed strong regulations on the banking and financial system, transportation, communications, stock markets and labor-management relations.

Roosevelt successfully built up the "[[New Deal Coalition]]", a powerful coalition of voters and interest groups that supported liberalism. Key components included big city machines and labor unions. Key voter groups included traditional Democrats, white Southerners, Catholics, Jews, and liberals, as well as many blacks. This united voter base allowed Democrats to be elected to Congress and the presidency for much of the next 30 years.

After a sweeping landslide reelection in 1936--losing only Maine and Vermont--Roosevelt stunned the nation, and his party, by calling for legislation to enlarge the Supreme Court by five new members. A firestorm of opposition erupted, led by his own vice president [[John Nance Garner]]. Roosevelt was defeated by an alliance of Republicans and conservative Democrats, who formed a [[Conservative coalition]] that managed to block nearly all liberal legislation. (Only a minimum wage law got through.) Angry with the conservative wing of his own party, Roosevelt tried to destroy it. In 1938, he actively campaigned against five incumbent conservative Democratic senators; all five senators won re-election.

Under FDR, the Democratic Party became identified closely with modern liberalism, which included the promotion of social welfare, unions and regulation of the economy. Civil rights were not on the party agenda at this time.

==Truman to Kennedy: 1945-1963==
Harry Truman took over unexpectedly in 1945, and the rifts inside the party that Roosevelt had papered over began to emerge. Former Vice President [[Henry A. Wallace]] denounced Truman as a war-monger for his anti-Soviet programs, the [[Truman Doctrine]], [[Marshall Plan]], and [[NATO]]. By cooperating with internationalist Republicans, Truman succeeded in defeating isolationists on the right and pro-Soviets on the left to establish a [[Cold War]] program that lasted until the fall of Communism in 1991. Wallace supporters and fellow travelers of the far left were pushed out of the party and the CIO in 1946-48 by young anti-Communists like [[Hubert Humphrey]], [[Walter Reuther]], and [[Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.]]. [[Hollywood]] emerged in the 1940s as an importance new base in the party, led by movie-star politicians such as [[Ronald Reagan]], who at this point in time strongly supported Roosevelt and Truman.<ref> Reagan became a conservative around 1960, saying the Democratic party had left him.</ref>

On the right the Republicans blasted Truman’s domestic policies. "Had Enough?" was the winning slogan as Republicans recaptured Congress in 1946. Many party leaders were ready to dump Truman, but they lacked an alternative. Truman counterattacked, pushing [[J. Strom Thurmond]] and his [[Dixiecrats]] out, and taking advantage of the splits inside the GOP. He was reelected in a stunning surprise. However all of Truman’s Fair Deal proposals, such as universal health care were defeated by the [[Conservative Coalition]] in Congress. His seizure of the steel industry was reversed by the Supreme Court.
In foreign policy, Europe was safe but troubles mounted in Asia. China fell to the Communists in 1949. Truman entered the [[Korean War]] without formal Congressional approval—the last time a president would ever do so. When the war turned to a stalemate in 1951 he fired General [[Douglas MacArthur]], a hero to conservatives. Republicans blasted Truman's failure to stop Communist gains in Asia. A series of petty scandals among friends and buddies of Truman further tarnished his image, allowing [[Dwight Eisenhower]] and the Republicans in 1952 to crusade against "Korea, Communism and Corruption." Truman dropped out of the presidential race early in 1952, leaving no obvious successor. The convention nominated [[Adlai Stevenson]] in 1952 and 1956, only to see him overwhelmed by two Eisenhower landslides.

[[Image:1952-32.jpg|thumb|480px|right|Stevenson and labor unions warn against a return of the Republican policies of Herbert Hoover in 1952 campaign poster]]

In Congress the powerful duo of House Speaker [[Sam Rayburn]] and Senate Majority leader [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] held the party together, often by compromising with Eisenhower. In 1958 the party made dramatic gains in the midterms and seemed to have a permanent lock on Congress. Indeed, Democrats had majorities in the House every election from 1930 to 1992 (except 1946 and 1952). Most southern Congressmen were conservative Democrats, however, and they usually worked with conservative Republicans. The result was a [[Conservative Coalition]] that blocked practically all liberal domestic legislation from 1937 to the 1970s, except for a brief spell 1964-65, when Johnson neutralized its power.

The nomination of [[John F. Kennedy]] in 1960 energized the Catholic population, which jammed motorcades and turned out in heavy numbers (over 80% voted for Kennedy), while also causing a backlash among white Protestants (over 70% of whom voted for Republican candidate [[Richard Nixon]]. Reaching beyond the traditional Irish, German, Italian and Polish Catholic ethnics, Viva Kennedy set out to mobilize the previously passive Latino vote, and it perhaps provided the margin of victory for Kennedy in Texas and New Mexico. Kennedy's victory reinvigorated the party. His youth, vigor and intelligence caught the popular imagination. In foreign policy he was strongly anti-Communist, and promptly launched an invasion of casto's Cuba; it failed badly. A few new programs like the Peace Corps harnessed idealism. In terms of legislation, Kennedy was stalemated by the [[Conservative Coalition]], and anyway his proposals were all cautious and incremental. In three years he was unable to pass any significant new legislation.

Kennedy's election did mark the coming of age of the Catholic component of the New Deal Coalition. After 1964 middle class Catholics started voting Republicans in the same proportion as their Protestant neighbors. Except for the Chicago of [[Richard J. Daley]], the last of the Democratic machines faded away. His involvement in Vietnam proved momentous, for his successor Lyndon Johnson decided to stay, and double the investment, and double the bet again and again until over 500,000 American soldiers were fighting in that small country.

==Civil Rights, Riots, War and collapse of the New Deal Coalition==
[[Image:LBJ-64.jpg|280px|left|thumb|President Lyndon Johnson ran for reelection in the shadow of Kennedy]]

The New Deal Coalition began to fracture as union and religious leaders demanded support for [[civil rights]], upsetting the party's traditional base of conservative Southern Democrats. After Harry Truman's platform showed support for civil rights and anti-segregation policies during the 1948 Democratic National Convention, many Southern Democratic delegates decided to split from the Party and formed the "[[Dixiecrats]]," led by [[South Carolina]] governor [[Strom Thurmond]] (who, as a Senator, would later join the Republican Party). Over the next few years, many conservative Democrats in the "[[Solid South]]" drifted away from the party. By 1940 most northern Blacks had shifted to the Democratic Party due to its New Deal relief programs and support for civil rights.

The party's dramatic reversal on civil rights issues culminated when Democratic President [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] signed into law the [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]]. The new laws ended segregation and also ended the main argument Democrats had used to block Republican gains in the South (that is, only the Democrats could protect segregation). The South became competitive in presidential politics in the 1970s and 1980s, giving strong support to Republican Ronald Reagan and rejecting the liberal northern candidates. The Democrats responded by nominating Southerners (Carter in 1976 and 1980, Clinton in 1992 and 1996, Gore in 2000). Few southern states were won by Democratic presidential candidates from the North (Humphrey in 1968, McGovern in 1972, Mondale in 1984, Dukakis in 1988, Kerry in 2004). At the state and local level the Republicans made slow, steady gains, especially among upscale middle class whites and migrants from the North. By the 1990s the GOP was competitive at the state and local level throughout the South. The Democrats made gains in the west, converting California to a Democratic stronghold and gaining in fast-growing Arizona and Nevada. The Northeast became more and more a Democratic enclave, especially after 2006 when numerous Republican moderates were defeated for reelection. the Midwest remained a battleground. The Democrats made strong gains in Illinois, but slipped a little in Minnesota.
[[Image:Demfight1968.jpg|thumb|290px|By 1968 Democrats were bitterly fighting over Vietnam and the failures of the Great Society]]

==1968 to 1999==
The Democratic party split five ways in 1968 and became the minority party in presidential elections for decades; after 1964 they won a majority of the presidential vote only in 2008.

[[Image:Jimmy Carter.jpg|thumb|right|180px|Jimmy Carter was elected in 1976 and defeated in 1980.]]
In 1972, the Democrats nominated Sen. [[George McGovern]] (SD) as the presidential candidate on a platform which advocated, among other things, U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam and a guaranteed minimum income for all Americans. McGovern's forces at the national convention ousted Mayor [[Richard J. Daley]] and the entire Chicago delegation, replacing them with insurgents led by [[Jesse Jackson]]. After it became know that McGovern's running mate, [[Thomas Eagleton]], had received electric shock therapy, McGovern said he supported Eagleton "1000%" but he was soon forced to drop him and find a new running mate. With his campaign stalled for several weeks McGovern finally selected [[Sargent Shriver]], a Kennedy-in-law who was close to Mayor Daley. On July 14, 1972, McGovern appointed his campaign manager, Jean Westwood as the first woman chair of the Democratic National Committee. McGovern was defeated in a landslide by incumbent [[Richard Nixon]], winning only Massachusetts and Washington, D.C. The [[Watergate affair]] of 1973-74 made corruption a central issue, especially after [[Gerald Ford]] pardoned Nixon in September 1974. The Democrats made major gains in the 1974 off-year elections.

In 1976, mistrust of the administration, complicated by a combination of economic recession and inflation, sometimes called ''[[stagflation]]'', led to Ford's narrow defeat in 1976 by [[Jimmy Carter]], a former governor of Georgia.

Carter represented the total outsider, who promised honesty in government. He had served as a naval officer, a farmer, a state senator, and a one-term governor. His only experience with federal politics was when he chaired the Democratic National Committee's congressional and gubernatorial elections in 1974. Some of Carter's major accomplishments consisted of the creation of a national energy policy and the consolidation of governmental agencies, resulting in two new cabinet departments, the [[United States Department of Energy]] and the [[United States Department of Education]]. Carter also successfully deregulated the trucking, airline, rail, finance, communications, and oil industries, bolstered the [[social security]] system, and appointed record numbers of women and minorities to significant government and judicial posts. He also enacted strong legislation on environmental protection, through the expansion of the [[National Park Service]] in [[Alaska]], creating 103 million new acres of land. In foreign affairs, Carter's accomplishments consisted of the [[Camp David Accords]], the [[Panama Canal Treaties]], the creation of full diplomatic relations with the [[People's Republic of China]], and the negotiation of the [[SALT II]] Treaty. In addition, he championed human rights throughout the world and used human rights as the center of his administration's foreign policy.

Even with all of these successes, Carter failed to implement a national health plan or to reform the tax system, as he had promised in his campaign. Inflation was also on the rise. Abroad, the Iranians held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days, and Carter's diplomatic and military rescue attempts failed. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan later that year weakened the perception Americans had of Carter. Even though he had already been defeated for re-election, Carter fortunately was able to negotiate the release of every American hostage. They were lifted out of Iran minutes after Reagan was inaugurated and Carter served as Reagan's emissary to greet them when they arrived in Germany. In 1980, Carter defeated liberal champion [[Edward Kennedy]] to gain renomination, but lost to conservative [[Ronald Reagan]] by a landslide. The Democrats lost 12 Senate seats, and for the first time since 1954, the Republicans controlled the Senate. The House, however, remained in Democratic hands.

===1980s: Battling Reaganism===
Instrumental in the election of Republican [[Ronald Reagan]] in 1980, were Democrats who supported many conservative policies. Among legislators, one of the most prominent of these consevative Democrats was Georgia congressman and second chairman of the [[John Birch Society]], [[Larry McDonald]], who was a passenger on [[Korean Airlines Flight 007]] shot down by the Soviets near [[Moneron Island]] on Sept. 1, 1983. The "Reagan Democrats" were Democrats before the Reagan years, and afterward, but they voted for [[Ronald Reagan]] in 1980 and 1984 (and for [[George H. W. Bush]] in 1988), producing their landslide victories. They were mostly white ethnics in the Northeast who were attracted to Reagan's social conservatism on issues such as abortion, and to his strong foreign policy. They did not continue to vote Republican in 1992 or 1996, so the term fell into disuse except as a reference to the 1980s. The term is not used to describe southern whites who became permanent Republicans in presidential elections. Stanley Greenberg, a Democratic pollster analyzed white ethnic voters, largely unionized auto workers, in suburban Macomb County, Michigan, just north of Detroit. The county voted 63 percent for Kennedy in 1960 and 66 percent for Reagan in 1984. He concluded that Reagan Democrats no longer saw Democrats as champions of their middle class aspirations, but instead saw it as being a party working primarily for the benefit of others, especially African Americans and the very poor. Bill Clinton targeted the Reagan Democrats with considerable success in 1992 and 1996.

[[Image:Liberal1984.jpg|thumb|350px]] The failure to hold the Reagan Democrats and the white South led to the final collapse of the [[New Deal coalition]]. Reagan carried 49 states against former Vice President and Minnesota Senator [[Walter Mondale]], a New Deal stalwart, in 1984. Massachusetts Governor [[Michael Dukakis]], running not as a New Dealer but as an efficiency expert in public administration, lost by a landslide in 1988 to Vice President [[George H. W. Bush]].

In response to these landslide defeats, the [[Democratic Leadership Council]] was created. It worked to move the Party rightwards to the ideological center in order to recover some of the fundraising that had been lost to the Republicans due to corporate donors supporting Reagan. With the Party retaining left-of-center supporters as well as supporters holding moderate or conservative views on some issues, the Democrats became generally a "big tent" or "catch all party" with widespread appeal to most opponents of the Republicans.

===The South Becomes Republican===
In the century after the end of [[Reconstruction]] in 1877, the white South identified with Democratic Party. The Democrats' lock on power was so strong, the region was called the [[Solid South]]. The Republicans only controlled parts of the Appalachian mountains, but they sometimes did compete for statewide office in the border states. Before 1964, the southern Democrats saw their party as the defender of the southern way of life, which included a respect for states' rights and an appreciation for traditional southern values. They repeatedly warned against the aggressive designs of Northern liberals and Republicans, as well as civil rights activists whom they denounced as "outside agitators."

However, between 1964 and 2004, the Democratic Party's lock on the South was broken. The long-term cause had to do with the South becoming more like the rest of the nation. It could not long stand apart in terms of racial segregation. Modernization had brought factories, national businesses, and larger, more cosmopolitan cities to the South, as well as millions of migrants from the North and more opportunities for higher education. Meanwhile, the cotton and tobacco economy of the traditional rural South faded away, as former farmers commuted to factory jobs.

Integration and the civil rights movement caused enormous controversy in the white South, with many attacking it as a violation of states' rights. When segregation was outlawed by court order and by the Civil Rights acts of 1964 and 1965, a die-hard element resisted integration, led by Democratic governors [[Orval Faubus]] of Arkansas, [[Lester Maddox]] of Georgia, and, especially [[George Wallace]] of Alabama. These populist governors appealed to a less-educated, blue-collar electorate that on economic grounds favored the Democratic Party, but opposed desegregation. After 1965 most Southerners accepted integration (with the exception of public schools). Believing themselves betrayed by the Democratic Party, traditional white southerners joined the new middle-class and the Northern transplants in moving toward the Republican Party. Meanwhile, newly enfranchised Black voters began supporting Democratic candidates at the 80-90-percent levels, producing Democratic leaders such as [[Julian Bond]] and [[John Lewis]] of Georgia, and [[Barbara Jordan]] of Texas. Just as Martin Luther King had promised, integration had brought about a new day in Southern politics, freeing both blacks and whites from old hatreds and fears.

Using issues of cultural conservatism, especially opposition to abortion and homosexuality and support for school prayer, Republicans attracted strong majorities among evangelical Christians. They were nationwide, but strongest in the South; before to the 1980s they were largely apolitical. Exit polls in 2004 showed that Bush led Kerry by 70-30% among Southern whites, who comprised 71% of the voters. Kerry had a 90-9 lead among the 18% of Southern voters who were black. One third of the Southern voters said they were white evangelicals; they voted for Bush by 80-20.<ref> See the exit polls at [http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.3.html |date=[[2004-11-02]]|accessdate=2006-11-18]</ref>

===1990s===

In the 1990s the Democratic Party revived itself, in part by moving to the right on economic and social policy. President [[Bill Clinton]], who defeated the incumbent [[George H. W. Bush]] in 1992, implemented a balanced federal budget and [[welfare reform]] (cutting benefits and requiring many recipients to take jobs), traditionally conservative causes. Labor unions, which had been steadily losing membership since the 1960s, found they had also lost political clout inside the Democratic Party: Clinton enacted the [[NAFTA]] free trade agreement with Canada and Mexico over the strong objection of these labor unions, much to the disappointment of those on the left of the party. The [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican Party]] took control of both the House of Representatives and the United States Senate after the 1994 election. Clinton was impeached in 1998 and subsequently acquitted in 1999.

When the [[DLC]] attempted to move the Democratic agenda in favor of more centrist positions, prominent Democrats from both the centrist and conservative factions assumed leadership of the party and its direction. Some liberals and progressives felt alienated by the Democratic Party, which they felt had become unconcerned with the interests of the common people and left-wing issues in general. Some Democrats challenged the validity of such critiques, citing the Democratic role in pushing for progressive reforms.

==21st century==
===Election of 2000===
During the presidential election of 2000, the Democrats chose Vice President [[Al Gore]] to be the party's candidate for the presidency. Gore and [[George W. Bush]], the Republican candidate and son of former President George H.W. Bush, disagreed on a number of issues, including abortion, gun control, environmentalism, gay rights, tax cuts, foreign policy, public education, global warming, judicial appointments, and affirmative action. Nevertheless, Gore's affiliation with Clinton and the DLC caused critics—Green Party presidential candidate [[Ralph Nader]] in particular—to assert that Bush and Gore were too similar, especially on free trade, reductions in social welfare, and the death penalty. "We want to punish the Democrats, we want to hurt them, wound them," Nader's closest advisor said.<ref>Harry G. Levinem "Ralph Nader, Suicide Bomber." ''The Village Voice'' May 3, 2004 at [http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0418,levine,53179,1.html] </ref>

Gore won a popular plurality of over 500,000 votes over Bush, but lost in the electoral vote by four votes. In a close election anything can be decisive, but many angry Democrats blamed Nader's third-party spoiler role for Gore's defeat. Controversy plagued the election, and Gore largely dropped from politics for years; by 2005 however he was making speeches critical of Bush's foreign and environmental policies.

Despite Gore's close defeat, the Democrats gained five seats in the Senate (including the election of [[Hillary Clinton]] in New York), to turn a 55-45 Republican edge into a 50-50 split (with a Republican Vice President breaking a tie). However, when Republican Senator [[Jim Jeffords]] of Vermont decided in 2001 to become an independent and vote with the Democratic Caucus, the majority status shifted along with the seat, including control of the floor (by the Majority Leader) and control of all committee chairmanships. However, the Republicans regained their Senate majority with gains in 2002 and 2004, leaving the Democrats with only 44 seats, the fewest since the 1920s.

===2001-2003===
In the aftermath of the [[9-11 Attacks]], the nation's focus was changed to issues of national security. All but one Democrat<ref> Representative [[Barbara Lee]] of Texas</ref> joined the Republicans to authorize President Bush to invade invasion of Afghanistan and overthrow the Taliban. House leader [[Richard Gephardt]] and Senate leader [[Thomas Daschle]] pushed Democrats to vote for the [[USA PATRIOT Act]] and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The Democrats were split over entering Iraq in 2003 and increasingly expressed concerns about both the justification and progress of the [[War on Terrorism]], as well as the domestic effects, including supposed threats to civil rights and civil liberties from the PATRIOT Act. Senator [[Russ Feingold]] was the only Senator to vote against the act; it received more resistance when it came up for renewal, but was renewed in 2006.

In the wake of the financial fraud scandal of the [[Enron Corporation]] and other corporations, Congressional Democrats pushed for a legal overhaul of business accounting with the intention of preventing further accounting fraud. This led to the bipartisan [[Sarbanes-Oxley Act]] in 2002. Economic issues did not work well in 2002, as the Democrats lost a few seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. They lost three seats in the Senate. While Democrats gained governorships in New Mexico (where [[Bill Richardson]] was elected), Arizona ([[Janet Napolitano]]) and Wyoming ([[Dave Freudenthal]]), other Democrats lost governorships in South Carolina ([[Jim Hodges]]), Alabama ([[Don Siegelman]]) and, for the first time in more than a century, Georgia ([[Roy Barnes]]). The election led to another round of soul searching about the party's narrowing base. The party's miseries mounted in 2003, when a voter recall unseated their unpopular governor of California, [[Gray Davis]], and replaced him which a charismatic liberal Republican [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]]. By the end of 2003 the four largest states had Republican governors: California, Texas, New York and Florida.

===Election of 2004===
The 2004 campaign began in late 2002, when Gore said he would not run again. [[Howard Dean]], former Governor of Vermont, an opponent of the war and a critic of the Democratic establishment, was the front-runner leading into the Democratic primaries. Dean had immense grassroots support, especially from the left wing of the party. Massachusetts Senator [[John Kerry]], a more centrist figure with heavy support from the [[Democratic Leadership Council]], was nominated because he was seen as more "electable" than Dean. Democrats moved to populist anti-business positions that denounced free trade and the [[NAFTA]] agreement. The party rhetoric attacked the Bush administration rather than propose alternative programs.

In the end, Kerry lost both the popular vote (by 3 million out of over 120 million votes cast) and the [[Electoral College]]. Republicans also gained four seats in the Senate and three seats in the House of Representatives, and for the first time since 1952, the Democratic leader of the Senate lost re-election. In the end, there were 3,660 Democratic state legislators across the nation to the Republicans' 3,557. Democrats gained governorships in Louisiana, New Hampshire and Montana. However, they lost the governorship of Missouri and a legislative majority in Georgia, which had long been a Democratic stronghold.

There were many reasons for the defeat. After the election most analysts concluded that Kerry was a poor campaigner.<ref>Evan Thomas and Staff of Newsweek,''Election 2004: How Bush Won and What You Can Expect in the Future''(2005)</ref> A group of Vietnam veterans opposed to Kerry called the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" undercut Kerry's use of his military past as a campaign strategy. Kerry was unable to reconcile his initial support of the [[Iraq War]] with his opposition to the war in 2004, or manage the deep split in the Democratic Party between those who favored and opposed the war. Republicans ran thousands of television commercials to argue that Kerry had flip-flopped on Iraq. When Kerry's home state of Massachusetts legalized same-sex marriage, the issue split liberal and conservative Democrats and independents (Kerry publicly stated throughout his campaign that he opposed same sex marriage, but favored civil unions). Republicans exploited the same-sex marriage issue by promoting ballot initiatives in 11 states that brought conservatives to the polls in large numbers; all 11 initiatives passed. Some Democrats argued that flaws in vote-counting systems may also have played a role in Kerry's defeat in Ohio. Other factors include a healthy job market, a rising stock market, strong home sales, and low unemployment.

After the 2004 election, prominent Democrats began to rethink the party's direction, and a variety of strategies for moving forward were voiced. Some Democrats proposed moving towards the right; others demanded that the party move more to the left and become a stronger opposition party. . Rethinking the party's position on gun control became a matter of discussion, brought up by [[Howard Dean]], [[Bill Richardson]], [[Brian Schweitzer]] and other Democrats who had won governorships in states where Second Amendment rights were important to many voters.

===2005 - 2007===
These debates were reflected in the 2005 campaign for Chairman of the [[Democratic National Committee]], which [[Howard Dean]] won. He sought to move the Democratic strategy away from the establishment, and bolster support for the party's state organizations, even in Red states.

When the 109th Congress convened in 2005, [[Harry Reid]], the new Senate Minority Leader, tried to convince the Democratic Senators to vote more as a bloc on important issues; he forced the Republicans to abandon their push for privatization of Social Security. In 2005, the Democrats retained their governorships in Virginia and New Jersey, electing [[Tim Kaine]] and [[Jon Corzine]], respectively. However, the party lost the mayoral race in New York City, a Democratic stronghold, for the fourth straight time.

In 2006, with scandals involving Republican lobbyist [[Jack Abramoff]], as well as GOP House leader [[Tom DeLay]], Ohio GOP governor [[Bob Taft]] and others, the Democrats used the slogan "Culture of corruption." Negative public opinion on the war in Iraq, along with widespread dissatisfaction among conservatives over government spending, dragged President Bush's job approval ratings down to the lowest levels of his presidency. To win control the Democrats had to add 15 seats in the House (they added 30), and 6 in the Senate (they added 6).

The Democratic Party's electoral success has been attributed to running relatively conservative Democrats in close seats, such as the Senate races in Virginia, Pennsylvania and Montana. <ref> Dewan Shaila and Anne E. Kornblut, "In Key House Races, Democrats Run to the Right," ''New York Times,'' 2006-10-30; but compare Rick Perlstein, "Who deserves credit for the Democratic comeback?" ''The New Republic'' 2006-11-08]] at [https://ssl.tnr.com/p/docsub.mhtml?i=w061106&s=perlstein110806] </ref> Exit polling suggested that corruption was a key issue for many voters.<ref>CNN, "Corruption named as key issue by voters in exit polls," 2006-11-08 at [http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/07/election.exitpolls/] </ref>

In 2006 Democrats gained a majority of governorships and made gains in many state legislatures. No Democratic incumbent was defeated in any major race.
===2007-2010===
[[File:Obama_approval_index_december_22_2009.jpg‎|thumb|250px]]
House Democrats chose Rep. [[Nancy Pelosi]] of California for Speaker, the first woman ever, but rejected her choice for Majority Leader. Senate Democrats promoted Harry Reid to Majority Leader. Neither have been very effective.

The presidential campaign of 2008 featured a remarkable duel between Obama--the first major black candidate, and [[Hillary Clinton]], the first major woman contender. Obama won with his charismatic oratory and his highly efficient fund-raising and strong organization in the caucus states, while Clinton went downscale to pick up big majorities among poor whites and Hispanics. The contest between Obama and GOP nominee [[John McCain]] was very close until September, when the collapse of the financial system soured the voters on the GOP.

The [[Obama Administration]] got off to a fast start in 2009, especially in vigorous efforts to combat the [[Recession of 2008]] with heavy new stimulus spending, massive loans to banks, increased regulation, and deep intervention in the automobile industry. All those policies were begun by Bush, and had failed to reverse the decline of the economy in late 2008. Whether they will now succeed remains an open question, with the GOP now voting solidly against them and some conservatives like [[Rush Limbaugh]] hoping that the Democrats will fail badly and that the people will again turn to the Republican party. The Democratic Party is feeling the sting from the opposition and many Democrats are beginning to question their own leadership. Liberals are disenchanted with Obama's hawkish position on the [[Afghanistan War]]. The health care reform that consumed most of 2009 remains unsettled, as public opinion has turned against it. Environmentalists now seem resigned to the failure of a [[cap and trade]] program to reduce CO2 emissions. Most of all the recession drags on. The stimulus bill was passed quickly in Feb. 2009 over almost unanimous GOP opposition, but despite promises of "shovel ready" projects, most of the money has not been spent a year later and the economy remains in the doldrums.

The elections in Nov. 2009 in New Jersey and Virginia went badly for the Democrats, as the GOP gained both governorships and many local races, not to mention the Democrats' fifth straight loss for the mayoralty of New York City.

see [[2010 Midterm Elections]]

==Symbols==
The most common symbol for the party is the donkey, although the party itself never officially adopted this symbol.<ref>[http://www.democrats.org/a/2005/06/history_of_the.php History of the Democratic Donkey]. </ref> Some historians suggest the jackass was born 1828 when Jackson was sometimes called a jackass by his opponents as a play on his name. A political cartoon depicting Jackson riding and directing a donkey (representing the Democratic Party) was published in 1837. A political cartoon by [[Thomas Nast]] in an 1870 revived the donkey as a symbol for the Democratic Party. Cartoonists ever since have followed Nast and used the donkey to represent the Democrats, and the elephant to represent the Republicans.

In the early 20th century, the traditional symbol of the Democratic Party in many states was the rooster, as opposed to the Republican eagle.

There is no official color, but since election night 2000 blue has become the identification color of the Democratic Party for maps, while the red has become the color of the Republicans. Increasingly blue is used by Democrats for promotions (e.g BuyBlue, BlueFund) and by the party itself, which in 2006 unveiled the "Red to Blue Program" to support Democratic candidates running against Republican incumbents in the 2006 midterm election.

[[Jefferson-Jackson Day]] annual fundraising celebrations are held by local chapters of the Democratic Party.

The song "[[Happy Days Are Here Again]]" is the unofficial song of the Democratic Party. It was used prominently when Roosevelt was nominated for president at the 1932 Democratic National Convention and remains a sentimental favorite for Democrats today. During the [[Bill Clinton|Clinton]] era, the [[Fleetwood Mac]] song "Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow" became a popular song at Democratic events, reflecting the growing prominence of Baby Boomers in the party.

==Democratic Presidents==
* [[Andrew Jackson]] (1829-1837)
* [[Martin Van Buren]] (1837-1841)
* [[James K. Polk]] (1845-1849)
* [[Franklin Pierce]] (1853-1857)
* [[James Buchanan]] (1857-1861)
* [[Grover Cleveland]] (1885-1889) (1893-1897)
* [[Woodrow Wilson]] (1913-1921)
* [[Franklin Roosevelt]] (1933-1945)
* [[Harry S Truman]] (1945-1953)
* [[John F. Kennedy]] (1961-1963)
* [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] (1963-1969)
* [[Jimmy Carter]] (1977-1981)
* [[Bill Clinton]] (1993-2001)
* [[Barack Obama]] (2009 - Present)

==See also==
*[[Previous Breaking News/Democrats|Articles about '''Democrats''' from previous "Breaking News"]]
*[[Gestapo care]]

==Bibliography==
===Current===
*Barone, Michael, and Grant Ujifusa, ''The Almanac of American Politics 2008: The Senators, the Representatives and the Governors: Their Records and Election Results, Their States and Districts'' (2007) covers all the live politicians with amazing detail. New edition every two years since 1975.
* Brownstein, Ronald. ''The Second Civil War: How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America''(2007)
* Crane, Michael. ''The Political Junkie Handbook: The Definitive Reference Books on Politics'' (2004) covers all the major issues explaining the parties' positions
*Sabato, Larry J. ''Divided States of America: The Slash and Burn Politics of the 2004 Presidential Election'' (2005).
*Sabato, Larry J. ed. ''The Sixth Year Itch: The Rise and Fall of the George W. Bush Presidency'' (1907), in-depth essays by scholars on key states in 2006
* Sabato, Larry J., and Howard R. Ernst eds. ''Political Parties and Elections'' (2007), 540pp; an encyclopedia with 450 entries by scholars; focus is 1945 to present
* Sabato, Larry J. and Bruce Larson. ''The Party's Just Begun: Shaping Political Parties for America's Future'' (2001) textbook.
* Shafer, Byron E. and Anthony J. Badger, eds. ''Contesting Democracy: Substance and Structure in American Political History, 1775-2000'' (2001), long essays by specialists on each time period
* Shafer, Byron and Richard Johnston. ''The End of Southern Exceptionalism'' (2006), uses statistical election data & polls to argue GOP growth was primarily a response to economic change
===Historical===
* ''American National Biography'' (20 volumes, 1999) covers all politicians no longer alive; online and paper copies at many academic libraries.
* Jensen, Richard. ''Grass Roots Politics: Parties, Issues, and Voters, 1854-1983'' (1983) [http://www.questia.com/library/book/grass-roots-politics-parties-issues-and-voters-1854-1983-by-christopher-c-gibbs-richard-j-jensen-steven-l-piott.jsp online edition]; survey by conservative scholar, with primary sources
* Kennedy, David M. ''Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945'' (2001), synthesis by leading scholar; Pulitzer prize [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=52284041 online edition]
* Kleppner, Paul et al. ''The Evolution of American Electoral Systems'' (1983), essays by scholars (some of them conservatives), 1790s to 1980s.
* Kleppner, Paul. ''The Third Electoral System 1853-1892: Parties, Voters, and Political Cultures'' (1979), analysis of voting behavior, with emphasis on region, ethnicity, religion and class. [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=24451028 online edition]
* Ling, Peter J. ''The Democratic Party: A Photographic History'' (2003).
* Patterson, James T. ''Grand Expectations: The United States, 1945-1974'' (1997) synthesis by leading scholar. [http://www.amazon.com/Grand-Expectations-United-1945-1974-History/dp/0195117972/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1211911625&sr=1-2 excerpt and text search]
* Patterson, James T. ''Restless Giant: The United States from Watergate to Bush vs. Gore'' (2005) synthesis by leading scholar. [http://www.amazon.com/Restless-Giant-United-Watergate-History/dp/0195305221/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1211911625&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]
* Ritchie, Donald A. ''Electing FDR: The New Deal Campaign of 1932'' (2007) [http://www.amazon.com/Electing-FDR-Campaign-Presidential-Elections/dp/0700615504/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1195784762&sr=8-2 excerpt and text search]
* Rutland, Robert Allen. ''The Democrats: From Jefferson to Clinton'' (1995).
* Shafer, Byron E. and Anthony J. Badger, eds. ''Contesting Democracy: Substance and Structure in American Political History, 1775-2000'' (2001), most recent collection of new essays by specialists on each time period:
**includes: "State Development in the Early Republic: 1775–1840" by Ronald P. Formisano; "The Nationalization and Racialization of American Politics: 1790–1840" by David Waldstreicher; "'To One or Another of These Parties Every Man Belongs;": 1820–1865 by Joel H. Silbey; "Change and Continuity in the Party Period: 1835–1885" by Michael F. Holt; "The Transformation of American Politics: 1865–1910" by Peter H. Argersinger; "Democracy, Republicanism, and Efficiency: 1885–1930" by Richard Jensen; "The Limits of Federal Power and Social Policy: 1910–1955" by Anthony J. Badger; "The Rise of Rights and Rights Consciousness: 1930–1980" by James T. Patterson, Brown University; and "Economic Growth, Issue Evolution, and Divided Government: 1955–2000" by Byron E. Shafer
* Schlisinger, Galbraith. ''Of the People: The 200 Year History of the Democratic Party'' (1992)
* Sundquist, James L. ''Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and Realignment of Political Parties in the United States'', (1983) [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=29223022 online edition
* Wilentz, Sean. ''The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln'' (2005), detailed synthesis by a leading liberal scholar. [http://www.amazon.com/Rise-American-Democracy-Jefferson-Lincoln/dp/0393058204/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1195784940&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search]
* Witcover, Jules. ''Party of the People: A History of the Democrats'' (2003)
* Schlesinger, Arthur Meier, Jr. ed. ''History of American Presidential Elections, 1789-2000'' (various multivolume editions, latest is 2001). For each election includes a short history by a leading scholar and a selection of primary documents.

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://www.democrats.org/ Democratic Party Official Site]
*[http://www.demconvention.com/assets/downloads/2008-Democratic-Platform-final.pdf 2008 Democratic Platform (pdf download)]

[[Category:United States Political Organizations]]
[[Category:United States Political Parties]]
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
[[Category:Progressive Era]]
[[Category:Gilded Age]]
[[Category:New Deal]]
[[Category:Reagan Era]]
[[Category:1960s]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Liberals]]
[[category:Jacksonian Democracy]]

Democratic Party

2010-08-06T20:01:33Z

ChrisGT90:

{{AmericanPoliticalParty
| party_name=Democratic Party
| party_articletitle = Democratic Party (United States)
| party_logo = [[Image:democraticpartyusalogo.png|200px]]
| website = [http://www.democrats.org www.democrats.org]
| headquarters = 430 South Capitol Street SE [[Washington, D.C.]] 20003
| chairman = [[Tim Kaine]]
| houseleader = [[Nancy Pelosi]]
| senateleader = [[Harry Reid]]
| foundation = 1832
| ideology = range from liberal to moderate
| fiscalpolicy = [[Socialist]]/[[Liberal]]
| socialpolicy = center-liberal
| colors = Blue (unofficial)
| footnotes =
}}
The '''Democratic Party''' is one of the two major political [[parties]] in the [[United States of America]]. It is the [[pro-abortion]], higher taxes party, while the [[Republican Party]] is the [[pro-life]], lower taxes party. President [[Barack Obama]] and other Democrats are generally [[liberal]].

Members of the Democratic Party are known as Democrats. In the 19th century the party was sometimes called "The Democracy." Today Republicans sometimes call it the "[[Democrat Party]]" as a term of ridicule. There are Democrats who claim to be [[conservative]], called the "[[Blue Dogs]]" in [[Congress]], but they often behave like "lapdogs" for the [[liberal]] party leadership when there is a controversial vote.

In the doldrums after 2000, the party roared back with major gains in 2006, which it expanded in 2008 to sweep control of the national government, and leave the GOP in a state of confusion and decline. The GOP bounced back in 2009, with near-unanimous opposition to contentions Democratic policies, especially as stimulus spending and health care reform. Polls show Obama's popularity began to sink in the summer of 2009.

The Democrats currently control the White House and have decisive majorities in the [[111th United States Congress]], together with the majority of state governorships and legislatures and control most large cities as well, while suburbs and rural areas are more likely to be in republican hands.<ref>[http://www.multistate.com/Site.nsf/Elections2006PostMaps?OpenPage Multistate.com] Post-Election 2006 Maps</ref> Polls show 50% of voters identify themselves with the Democratic Party as opposed to 35% for the Republican Party.<ref>[http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=312 Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007] Pew Research Center, 22 March 2007</ref> The Democratic-majority Congress currently has a 55% negative approval rating, with only 31% expressing approval.<ref> [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/congressional_job_approval-903.html]</ref>

==Policies and criticism==
The views of individual Democrats sometimes diverge from the party's official stance as expressed in its national platform, however unlike the Republican party, the Democratic National Committee has not allowed dissenting opinions to share the podium on matters such as abortion at National Conventions. <ref>[http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_03/005787.php] , http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_03/005787.php, March 6, 2005</ref>

===Economic policy===
[[Image:Unemployment.jpg|thumb|241px|right|''Source: Bureau of Labor Statisitcs'' [http://astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2009/07/anti-stimulus-in-pictures-any-questions.html]]]
In the field of economic policy, Democrats tend to favor high progressive taxes, more regulation, and higher government spending.

The Democratic Party has historically had ties to [[labor union|organized labor]].<ref> http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/913wopoz.asp Paying Dues - The Democrats settle up with their union bosses, [[Weekly Standard]], July 25, 2007 </ref>

The [[National Education Association]],<ref>[http://www.nea.org/index.html National Education Association homepage]</ref> the largest union of public school teachers, is a backbone of the party, supplying the largest number of delegates to its national conventions.

Democrats typically state that they want to help low-income Americans, however they usually seek to accomplish this by increasing the tax burden on the wealthiest Americans.

Since passage of the Economic Recovery Act of 2009, [[unemployment]] has increased from below 7% to slightly under 10%.

===Foreign and military policy===
According to its platform, the Democratic Party has the objective of strengthening America. Democratic national leadership has been accused of being ambivalent about terrorism<ref>[http://www.news10.net/display_story.aspx?storyid=22045 "Democrats, ACLU Outraged Over Traveler Terrorism Screening Program"] C. Johnson, Associated Press</ref> and insufficiently patriotic.<ref>[http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0112/01/smn.19.html CNN Saturday Morning News]Transcript: December 1, 2001 </ref> A poll conducted by [[Fox News]] released in October 2007 found that 1 in 5 Democrats – nearly 10 million voters – think the world will be better off if the [[United States]] were to lose the [[War in Iraq]].<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,299374,00.html Nearly 1 in 5 Democrats Say World Will Be Better Off if U.S. Loses War], FOX News Poll, October 04, 2007.</ref> The poll found this sentiment 3 to 4 times higher among Democrats than among moderate, centrist, and Republican voters.

===Education===
An organization affiliated with the [[Democratic Leadership Council]] called the [[Progressive Policy Institute]] claims a long-standing opposition to school vouchers.<ref>21st Century Schools Project Bulletin: Special Edition [http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=110&subsecID=900001&contentID=250630 ''Putting Vouchers in Perspective''], PPI E-newsletter 2 July 2002</ref> Jonathan Alter of ''Newsweek'' warned that opposition to vouchers might alienate some traditional Democratic voting blocs:
:"Can wealthy white liberals - many of whom send their kids to private school - really say to poor parents: 'We can have choices, but you must not?'...This is a glaring hypocrisy sitting at the heart of the liberal opposition to targeted vouchers… Right now, Democrats are in a highly compromised position on education."<ref>[http://www.edreform.com/index.cfm?fuseAction=newsLetter&sectionID=29&NLissueID=4&articleID=11&altCol=2 Center For Education Reform, Monthly Letter to Friends No. 75], Back to School 2002.</ref>

===Environment vs Labor===
Two other important coalition groups also find themselves in direct conflict with each other within the Democratic party coalition--[[Environmentalist]]s and Labor Unions. While environmentalists support efforts like clean air and alternative fuels, for example, this creates tension with the workers of American automobile manufactures whose jobs are threatened by environmental policies such as increasing regulations and high costs. Such policies can lead to cutbacks and layoffs. Balancing these issues is difficult because some sacrifices of interests must be made by both sides.

===Healthcare===
Democratic leaders have endorsed various [[Democratic Health Care Plans]]; the question in 2009 is whether a new trillion dollar plan can pass in a time of economic crisis.

Therefore, many argue that there may be some advantages to a universal health care system. Democrats generally regard [[universal health care]] to be a priority because of the appeal to poorer voters without any kind of [[health insurance]].

===Gay Rights===
White Democratic leaders --but not blacks or Latinos--consistently favor measures such as the establishment of [[same-sex civil union]]s. They mostly reject [[gay marriage]].

===Other Policies===
Democrats frequently support the minimum wage, workplace protections, the right of women to choose to have an [[abortion]], [[gun control]], gay marriage, and the separation of church and state.

==Religion==
In the United States, there is some correlation between religious and political affiliation, though people of all faiths and denominations can be found among the supporters of each of the main parties.

Historically [[Roman Catholic Church|Catholic]] voters have had a tendency to identify with the Democratic Party; in recent decades there has been little difference. However Catholic politicians are mostly Democrats, including Speaker of the House [[Nancy Pelosi]] and Massachusetts Senator [[Ted Kennedy]]. However, several general ideals of the Democratic Party's platform - most notably, the party's overall support for the legality of [[abortion]] - are contrary to the position of the [[Catholic Church]].

With regard to Protestants, members of [[Evangelical]] churches in recent years have voted about 70-80% Republican. However, the large majority of Democratic Party members are Protestants. One unusual feature of the Democratic Party, however, is that it draws substantial support both from committed African-American Protestants (most of whom are Baptists) and from secular and atheist voters. The strong opposition to [[homosexuality]] found among many Black Protestants contrasts strikingly with the support frequently shown by other Democrats for the [[homosexual agenda]]. One reason for this contrast could be the Democrats' strong support for minority rights.

Democrats also generally believe that religion should be separate from public life, and as such are typically supported by the ACLU. For example, in 1999 the Congress took up a bill to protect the display of the [[Ten Commandments]]. In the House of Representatives, over 3/4ths of the Democratic party members voted to remove the display.<ref>http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/06/18/gun.rollcall/ten.commandments.html</ref>. The measure did not pass the Legislature, and as a result when Justice [[Roy Moore]] posted a [[Ten Commandments]] display in his courthouse, the ACLU was able to have the display removed.

==History==
[[File:Dem-leaders.jpg|thumb|300px|Clockwise from far left: presidents Carter, Kennedy, Clinton, Wilson, Johnson, Truman, Jackson, Roosevelt]]
===First Party System===
Democrats claim the [[Thomas Jefferson]] founded their party in 1793 at the start of the [[First Party System]]. The [[Democratic-Republican Party]] was a political party established during the 1790's under the leadership of Thomas Jefferson and [[James Madison]]. It was generally called the Republican Party, but it had no relation to today's Republican Party, founded in 1854. By about 1816, the Federalist Party had broken up as a national organization. With its decline, the Democratic-Republican Party split into several groups. [[Andrew Jackson]] emerged as the candidate of one of these groups and was elected President in 1828.

===Origins===
Most historians regard Jackson's 1832 campaign organization as the beginning of today's Democratic Party. The Democratic Party itself traces its origin to Jefferson's Democratic-Republican Party.<ref>[[World Book]]</ref> A few Democratic-Republicans, such as [[John Quincy Adams]] and [[Henry Clay]], created the [[National Republican Party]]. Adams supporters called themselves National Republicans, antecedents of the Whig and later the Republican parties.<ref>William DeGregorio, ''The Complete Book of U.S. Presidents'', Gramercy 1997</ref>

The modern Democratic party was formed during 1828-34, under the national leadership of Jackson and Van Buren, with organizations in all the states comprised of local political leaders. This became the era of [[Jacksonian Democracy]]. The Jacksonians resembled the [[Jeffersonian Democracy|Jeffersonians]] especially in terms of anti-elite rhetoric of opposition to "aristocracy" (that is, wealthy old families), distrust of banks (and paper money), and faith in "the people." By his extensive use of federal [[Spoils system|patronage]], President Jackson removed old office-holders to make way for party loyalists. With the emergence of the Whig Party, the nation now had a new party system, the [[Second Party System]], which lasted until 1854.

The party held its first national convention in 1832 to choose a new running mate for Jackson; it nominated Martin Van Buren for vice president and endorsed the reelection of Jackson. Jackson easily defeated Clay in 1832. In the political realignment of 1828-32, some of Jackson's supporters from the election of 1828, especially businessmen and bankers, switched to the opposition Whig Party as Jackson crusaded against the [[Second Bank of the United States]]. The name "Democratic Party" became common by the mid-1830s.

== Jacksonian Democracy: 1832-1854 ==
[[image:donk1837.jpg|thumb|300px|1837 cartoon shows Democratic Party as donkey ]]
The new party dominated the [[Second Party System]] (as political scientists call it; historians call it "Jacksonian Democracy", 1832-54. After 1832, the Democratic Party drew support from a cross section of the country; every group was represented. However the vast majority of rich merchants, bankers and plantation owners were Whigs, as were most evangelical Protestants. The party was strongest among traditionalistic farmers, frontiersmen, unskilled workers, Irish Catholics, and local or state political leaders. It was weakest in [[New England]], where industrialization turned most factory workers and white collar workers into Whigs, but was dominant in all other regions. The key issues it promoted were opposition to elites and aristocrats, popular democracy (in terms of voting rights and access to government patronage jobs) and opposition to the [[Bank of the United States]] (Jackson vetoed its charter renewal in 1832). The policies were known as [[Jacksonian Democracy]]. [[Image:Jackson1832.jpg|thumb|300px|left]]

Banking and tariffs were the central domestic policy issues from 1828 to 1852. The Democrats favored the [[Mexican-American War]]; Whigs opposed it. Democrats attracted Catholic Irish and German immigrants and denounced anti-immigrant nativism. Both the Democrats and Whigs were divided on the issue of slavery.

In the 1830s the [[Loco-Focos]] in New York City were radically democratic, anti-monopoly, and proponents of [[laissez-faire]]. Their chief spokesman was writer [[William Leggett]]. At this time labor unions were few; some were loosely affiliated with the party.

The economy went sour in the late 1830s with Van Buren getting the blame; he lost reelection as president in 1840 to the Whig [[William Henry Harrison]]. The Democrats gained the White House back in 1844 with [[James K. Polk]]. He had a successful term, then retired. The Democratic National Committee was created in 1848 at the convention that nominated General [[Lewis Cass]], who lost to General [[Zachary Taylor]] of the Whigs. In state after state the Democrats gained small but permanent advantages over the Whigs, until by 1852 the Whig Party was fatally weakened by divisions regarding the issue of slavery and they soon vanished.

The Democratic party dominated the North from the 1840s to 1854. Northern Democrats opposed banks, criticized corporate practices, and preached the ideals of a free society. They called for rapid territorial expansion of the United States, saying that in territorial expansion lay a means for thwarting the pretensions of the [[Slave Power]].

[[Franklin Pierce]] of New Hampshire was elected president in 1852, followed by [[James Buchanan]] of Pennsylvania in 1856. They proved poor presidents who lost control of the slavery issue, and the party, as the nation broke apart and fought the [[American Civil War]].

==Third Party System: Civil War, Gilded Age: 1854-1896==
During the [[Third Party System]] (1854-1896) the Democrats became the minority in the face of the newly formed Republican Party, which controlled nearly all northern states by 1860, bringing a solid majority in the Electoral College. A powerful Republican issue was the allegation that northern Democrats, including "Doughfaces" like Pierce and Buchanan, and advocates of popular sovereignty like [[Stephen A. Douglas]] and [[Lewis Cass]], were accomplices to the [[Slave Power]]. The Republicans meant by Slave Power the conspiracy of slaveholders to seize control of the federal government and block the progress of liberty.

[[Image:DEM1860.JPG|200px|thumb|left|To vote for Douglas in Virginia, a man had to deposit the ticket in the official ballot box.]]
In 1860 the Democrats were unable to stop the election of Republican [[Abraham Lincoln]], even as they feared his election would lead to civil war. The party split in two. The northern wing nominated Douglas, and the southern wing nominated Vice President [[John C. Breckinridge]]. Douglas campaigned across the country and came in second in the popular vote, but carried only Missouri. Breckinridge carried 11 slave states.

The Republican Party was beginning a 50-year era of dominance (1858-1910). During the war, Northern Democrats divided into two factions, [[War Democrats]], who supported the military policies of President Lincoln, and [[Copperheads]], who strongly opposed them. Historian Kenneth Stampp has captured the Copperhead spirit in his depiction of Democratic Congressman [[Daniel W. Voorhees]] of Indiana:
<blockquote>There was an earthy quality in Voorhees, "the tall sycamore of the Wabash." On the stump his hot temper, passionate partisanship, and stirring eloquence made an irresistible appeal to the western Democracy. His bitter cries against protective tariffs and national banks, his intense race prejudice, his suspicion of the eastern Yankee, his devotion to personal liberty, his defense of the Constitution and state rights faithfully reflected the views of his constituents. Like other Jacksonian agrarians he resented the political and economic revolution then in progress. Voorhees idealized a way of life which he thought was being destroyed by the current rulers of his country. His bold protests against these dangerous trends made him the idol of the Democracy of the Wabash Valley.<ref>Stampp, 211.</ref></blockquote>

The Democrats lost consecutive presidential elections from 1860 through 1880 (but 1876 was in dispute); 1884 was their next victory. The Democrats were weakened by their record of opposition to the Civil War but nevertheless benefited from white Southerners' resentment of Reconstruction and consequent hostility to the Republican Party. The [[Redeemers]] gave the Democrats control of every Southern state; the disenfranchisement of black voters in most of the South took place 1890-1900. From 1880 to 1960 the "[[Solid South]]" voted Democratic in all presidential elections (except 1928). After 1900 the key election in southern states was the Democratic primary; victory in the that primary was "tantamount to election" because the GOP was so weak.

Though Republicans continued to control the White House until 1912 (except 1884 and 1892), the Democrats remained competitive in the states, especially in the mid-Atlantic and lower Midwest, and controlled the House of Representatives for most of that period. In the election of 1884, [[Grover Cleveland]], the conservative Democratic Governor of New York, won the presidency, a feat he repeated in 1892, having lost in the election of 1888.

[[Image:1893cleveland-typewriter.jpg|thumb|350px|Typewriters were new in 1893 and this Gillam cartoon from ''Puck'' shows that Cleveland can't get the Democratic "machine" to work as the keys (key politicians) won't respond to his efforts.]]

Cleveland was the leader of the [[Bourbon Democrats]], the conservative wing of the party. They represented business interests, supported banking and railroad goals, promoted capitalism, opposed imperialism and U.S. verseas expansion, opposed the annexation of [[Hawaii]], fought for the [[gold standard]], and opposed [[Bimetallism]]. They strongly supported reform movements such as [[Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act|Civil Service Reform]] and opposed corruption of city bosses, leading the fight against the [[Tweed Ring]]. The leading Bourbons included [[Samuel J. Tilden]], [[David Bennett Hill]] and [[William C. Whitney]] of New York, [[Arthur Pue Gorman]] of Maryland, [[Thomas F. Bayard]] of Delaware, [[William L. Wilson]] of West Virginia, [[John Griffin Carlisle]] of Kentucky, [[William F. Vilas]] of Wisconsin, [[J. Sterling Morton]] of Nebraska, [[John M. Palmer]] of Illinois, [[Horace Boies]] of Iowa, [[L.Q.C. Lamar]] of Mississippi, and railroad builder [[James J. Hill]] of Minnesota. A prominent intellectual was [[Woodrow Wilson]]. The Bourbons were in power when the [[Panic of 1893]] hit; it was a deep depression and they took the blame. A fierce struggle inside the party ensued, with catastrophic losses for both the Bourbon and agrarian factions in 1894, leading to the showdown in 1896.
[[Image:Dead-dem1880.jpg|thumb|550px|In 1880 when General Hancock (right) became the presidential nominee of the Democrats, Republican cartoonists showed the Democratic party history as a horror chamber featuring atrocities in the Civil War era; the donkey" shows the party as a coalition of the rear end of the South joned to the rear end of the North]]

===Ethnocultural voting: pietistic Republicans versus liturgical Democrats===
Religious lines were sharply drawn.<ref>Kleppner (1979).</ref> Methodists, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Scandinavian Lutherans and other pietists and evangelicals in the North were tightly linked to the Republican Party. In sharp contrast, liturgical groups, especially the Catholics, Episcopalians, and German Lutherans, looked to the Democratic Party for protection from pietistic moralism, especially prohibition. Both parties cut across the class structure, with the Democrats more bottom-heavy.

Cultural issues, especially prohibition and foreign language schools became important because of the sharp religious divisions in the electorate. In the North, about 50% of the voters were pietistic or evangelical Protestants who believed the government should be used to reduce social sins, such as drinking. Liturgical churches (Roman Catholics, German Lutherans, Episcopalians) comprised over a quarter of the vote and wanted the government to stay out of the morality business. Prohibition debates and referenda heated up politics in most states over a period of decade, as national prohibition was finally passed in 1918 (and repealed in 1933), serving as a major issue in the North between the wet Democracy and the dry GOP.<ref>In the South the Democrats were mostly on the dry side. Kleppner (1979).</ref>

==The Bryan Movement==
[[Image:Mark Hanna 1896 election.jpg|thumb|290px|right|Democratic attack ad in 1896 against GOP National Chairman [[Mark Hanna]]; cartoon by Davenport depicts Hanna as a slave driver; from Hearst's ''New York Journal'']]
[[Grover Cleveland]] led the conservative, pro-business [[Bourbon Democrat]]s but as the [[Panic of 1893|depression of 1893]] deepened his enemies multiplied. The Panic of 1893 started in February 1893, a full month before Cleveland became president. Convinced that the [[Sherman Silver Purchase Act]], passed under the administration of [[Benjamin Harrison]], was largely responsible for the alarming drain on federal gold, President Cleveland called Congress into special session to urge its repeal. Congress consented, but only after bitter debate that divided the Democratic party into two hostile camps-the eastern "goldbugs" and the silver wing of the West and South that was to propel young [[William Jennings Bryan]] to the fore in 1896.<ref>William DeGregorio, ''The Complete Book of U.S. Presidents'', Gramercy 1997</ref> At the 1896 convention the silverite-agrarian faction repudiated the president, and nominated the crusading orator [[William Jennings Bryan]] on a platform of inflation through "free" silver. The idea was that minting huge numbers of silver dollars would flood the economy with cash and end the depression. Eastern Democrats, unable to accept the party's free-silver platform and unwilling to support McKinley for his tariff views, nominated their own candidate, John M. Palmer of Illinois and called themselves the National, or Gold, Democrats.<ref>William DeGregorio, ''The Complete Book of U.S. Presidents'', Gramercy 1997</ref> The [[Gold Democrats]] attracted politicians and intellectuals (including [[Woodrow Wilson]] and [[Frederick Jackson Turner]]) who refused to vote Republican.

Bryan, an overnight sensation because of his phenomenal "Cross of Gold" speech, crusaded against the gold standard. Crisscrossing the Midwest and East by special train, he gave over 500 speeches to audiences in the millions. In St. Louis he gave 36 speeches to workingmen's audiences all over the city, all in one day. Most Democratic newspapers were hostile (except [[William Randolph Hearst]]'s ''New York Journal'') but Bryan seized control of the media by making the news every day, as he hurled thunderbolts against Eastern monied interests. The rural folk in South and Midwest were ecstatic, showing an enthusiasm never before seen. Ethnic Democrats, especially Germans, however, were alarmed and frightened by Bryan. The middle classes, businessmen, newspaper editors, factory workers, railroad workers, and prosperous farmers generally rejected Bryan's crusade. Bryan was overwhelmed by [[William McKinley]] in the most exciting race in national history.<ref> Refuting Bryan's charges, historians have discovered there was little coercion of workers.</ref> McKinley promised a return to prosperity based on the gold standard, support for industry, railroads and banks, and pluralism that would enable every group to move ahead. Bryan did however, win the hearts and minds of a majority of Democrats. The election of 1896 was a political realignment. The victory of the Republican Party marked the start of the "Progressive Era," from 1896 to 1932, in which the GOP usually was dominant.

==Fourth Party System: Bryan, Wilson, Progressivism: 1896-1932 ==
The [[Fourth Party System]] began with the 1896 election, a realignment during which the GOP controlled the presidency for 28 of 36 years. The GOP dominated most of the Northeast and Midwest, and half the West. Bryan, with a base in the South and Plains states, was strong enough to get the nomination in 1900 (losing to McKinley) and 1908 (losing to Taft). [[Theodore Roosevelt]] dominated the first decade of the century—and to the annoyance of Democrats "stole" the trust issue by crusading against trusts.

[[Image:Steal~trust.JPG|thumb|250px|[[Theodore Roosevelt]] steals the anti-trust issue from the Democrats, 1904]]

Anti-Bryan conservatives controlled the convention in 1904, but they faced a [[Theodore Roosevelt]] landslide. Bryan dropped his free silver and anti-imperialism rhetoric and supported mainstream progressive issues, such as the income tax, anti-trust, and direct election of Senators. He backed [[Woodrow Wilson]] in 1912, was rewarded with the State Department, then resigned in protest against Wilson's non-pacifistic policies in 1916. Northern Democrats were progressive on most issues, but generally opposed prohibition, were lukewarm regarding woman's suffrage, and were reluctant to undercut the "boss system" in the big cities.

Taking advantage of a deep split in the GOP, the Democrats took control of the House in 1910, and elected the intellectual reformer [[Woodrow Wilson]] in 1912 and 1916. Wilson successfully led Congress to a series of Progressive laws, including a reduced tariff, stronger antitrust laws, the [[Federal Reserve System]], hours-and-pay benefits for railroad workers, and outlawing of child labor (which was reversed by the Supreme Court). Furthermore, constitutional amendments for prohibition and woman suffrage were passed in his second term. In effect, Wilson laid to rest the issues of tariffs, money and antitrust that had dominated politics for 40 years. Wilson led the U.S. to victory in the World War, and turned his attention to foreign affairs. He wrote parts of the [[Versailles Treaty]], especially the new [[League of Nations]]. But in 1919 Wilson's political skills faltered, and suddenly everything turned sour. The Senate rejected Versailles and the League, a nationwide wave of strikes and violence caused unrest, and Wilson's health collapsed. The GOP came roaring back in a landslide in 1920, as [[Warren G. Harding]] defeated a Democratic ticket memorable for having [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] as the vice presidential nominee.

[[Image:D-Edge-Congress.JPG|thumb|300px|Before 1932 Republicans usually controlled Congress; after 1932 the Democrats usually were in control]]

At the 1924 Democratic National Convention, the big fight was over a resolution denouncing by name the [[Ku Klux Klan]]; it was pushed by New York governor [[Al Smith]] and Alabama Senator [[Oscar W. Underwood]] in order to embarrass the front-runner, [[William McAdoo]] of California. After furious debate, the resolution failed by just a single vote. The KKK faded away soon after, but the deep split in the party over cultural issues, especially Prohibition, facilitated Republican landslides in 1920, 1924 and 1928. However [[Al Smith]] did build a strong Catholic base in the big cities in 1928, and [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]]'s election as Governor of New York that year brought a new leader to center stage.

== Fifth Party System: The New Deal ==
[[Image:509px-FDR in 1933.jpg|thumb|left|180px|President [[Franklin Delano Roosevelt]] (1933-1945)]]
The [[Wall Street Crash 1929|stock market crash of 1929]] and the ensuing [[Great Depression]] set the stage for a more progressive government and [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] won a [[landslide victory]] in the [[U.S. presidential election, 1932|election of 1932]], campaigning on a platform of "Relief, Recovery, and Reform." This came to be termed "[[New Deal|The New Deal]]" after a phrase in his acceptance speech. The Democrats also swept to large majorities in both houses of Congress, and among state Governors. Roosevelt altered the nature of the Party, away from laissez-faire capitalism, and towards an ideology of economic regulation and insurance against hardship. Conservative Democrats were outraged; led by [[Al Smith]] they formed the [[American Liberty League]] in 1934 and counterattacked. They failed and either retired from politics or joined the GOP. A few of them, such as [[Dean Acheson]] found their way back to the Democratic Party.

After making gains in Congress in 1934 Roosevelt moved left and embarked on an ambitious legislative program called "The Second New Deal." It was characterized by building up labor unions, nationalizing welfare by the [[WPA]] (which 2 million employed unemployed men), setting up [[Social Security]] and raising taxes on business profits.<ref> In general the New Deal, 1933-40, did not raise taxes, except for the Social Security tax that went into effect in 1937.</ref>

Roosevelt's [[New Deal]] programs focused on job creation through public works projects as well as Social Security. In the name of "reform" it imposed strong regulations on the banking and financial system, transportation, communications, stock markets and labor-management relations.

Roosevelt successfully built up the "[[New Deal Coalition]]", a powerful coalition of voters and interest groups that supported liberalism. Key components included big city machines and labor unions. Key voter groups included traditional Democrats, white Southerners, Catholics, Jews, and liberals, as well as many blacks. This united voter base allowed Democrats to be elected to Congress and the presidency for much of the next 30 years.

After a sweeping landslide reelection in 1936--losing only Maine and Vermont--Roosevelt stunned the nation, and his party, by calling for legislation to enlarge the Supreme Court by five new members. A firestorm of opposition erupted, led by his own vice president [[John Nance Garner]]. Roosevelt was defeated by an alliance of Republicans and conservative Democrats, who formed a [[Conservative coalition]] that managed to block nearly all liberal legislation. (Only a minimum wage law got through.) Angry with the conservative wing of his own party, Roosevelt tried to destroy it. In 1938, he actively campaigned against five incumbent conservative Democratic senators; all five senators won re-election.

Under FDR, the Democratic Party became identified closely with modern liberalism, which included the promotion of social welfare, unions and regulation of the economy. Civil rights were not on the party agenda at this time.

==Truman to Kennedy: 1945-1963==
Harry Truman took over unexpectedly in 1945, and the rifts inside the party that Roosevelt had papered over began to emerge. Former Vice President [[Henry A. Wallace]] denounced Truman as a war-monger for his anti-Soviet programs, the [[Truman Doctrine]], [[Marshall Plan]], and [[NATO]]. By cooperating with internationalist Republicans, Truman succeeded in defeating isolationists on the right and pro-Soviets on the left to establish a [[Cold War]] program that lasted until the fall of Communism in 1991. Wallace supporters and fellow travelers of the far left were pushed out of the party and the CIO in 1946-48 by young anti-Communists like [[Hubert Humphrey]], [[Walter Reuther]], and [[Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.]]. [[Hollywood]] emerged in the 1940s as an importance new base in the party, led by movie-star politicians such as [[Ronald Reagan]], who at this point in time strongly supported Roosevelt and Truman.<ref> Reagan became a conservative around 1960, saying the Democratic party had left him.</ref>

On the right the Republicans blasted Truman’s domestic policies. "Had Enough?" was the winning slogan as Republicans recaptured Congress in 1946. Many party leaders were ready to dump Truman, but they lacked an alternative. Truman counterattacked, pushing [[J. Strom Thurmond]] and his [[Dixiecrats]] out, and taking advantage of the splits inside the GOP. He was reelected in a stunning surprise. However all of Truman’s Fair Deal proposals, such as universal health care were defeated by the [[Conservative Coalition]] in Congress. His seizure of the steel industry was reversed by the Supreme Court.
In foreign policy, Europe was safe but troubles mounted in Asia. China fell to the Communists in 1949. Truman entered the [[Korean War]] without formal Congressional approval—the last time a president would ever do so. When the war turned to a stalemate in 1951 he fired General [[Douglas MacArthur]], a hero to conservatives. Republicans blasted Truman's failure to stop Communist gains in Asia. A series of petty scandals among friends and buddies of Truman further tarnished his image, allowing [[Dwight Eisenhower]] and the Republicans in 1952 to crusade against "Korea, Communism and Corruption." Truman dropped out of the presidential race early in 1952, leaving no obvious successor. The convention nominated [[Adlai Stevenson]] in 1952 and 1956, only to see him overwhelmed by two Eisenhower landslides.

[[Image:1952-32.jpg|thumb|480px|right|Stevenson and labor unions warn against a return of the Republican policies of Herbert Hoover in 1952 campaign poster]]

In Congress the powerful duo of House Speaker [[Sam Rayburn]] and Senate Majority leader [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] held the party together, often by compromising with Eisenhower. In 1958 the party made dramatic gains in the midterms and seemed to have a permanent lock on Congress. Indeed, Democrats had majorities in the House every election from 1930 to 1992 (except 1946 and 1952). Most southern Congressmen were conservative Democrats, however, and they usually worked with conservative Republicans. The result was a [[Conservative Coalition]] that blocked practically all liberal domestic legislation from 1937 to the 1970s, except for a brief spell 1964-65, when Johnson neutralized its power.

The nomination of [[John F. Kennedy]] in 1960 energized the Catholic population, which jammed motorcades and turned out in heavy numbers (over 80% voted for Kennedy), while also causing a backlash among white Protestants (over 70% of whom voted for Republican candidate [[Richard Nixon]]. Reaching beyond the traditional Irish, German, Italian and Polish Catholic ethnics, Viva Kennedy set out to mobilize the previously passive Latino vote, and it perhaps provided the margin of victory for Kennedy in Texas and New Mexico. Kennedy's victory reinvigorated the party. His youth, vigor and intelligence caught the popular imagination. In foreign policy he was strongly anti-Communist, and promptly launched an invasion of casto's Cuba; it failed badly. A few new programs like the Peace Corps harnessed idealism. In terms of legislation, Kennedy was stalemated by the [[Conservative Coalition]], and anyway his proposals were all cautious and incremental. In three years he was unable to pass any significant new legislation.

Kennedy's election did mark the coming of age of the Catholic component of the New Deal Coalition. After 1964 middle class Catholics started voting Republicans in the same proportion as their Protestant neighbors. Except for the Chicago of [[Richard J. Daley]], the last of the Democratic machines faded away. His involvement in Vietnam proved momentous, for his successor Lyndon Johnson decided to stay, and double the investment, and double the bet again and again until over 500,000 American soldiers were fighting in that small country.

==Civil Rights, Riots, War and collapse of the New Deal Coalition==
[[Image:LBJ-64.jpg|280px|left|thumb|President Lyndon Johnson ran for reelection in the shadow of Kennedy]]

The New Deal Coalition began to fracture as union and religious leaders demanded support for [[civil rights]], upsetting the party's traditional base of conservative Southern Democrats. After Harry Truman's platform showed support for civil rights and anti-segregation policies during the 1948 Democratic National Convention, many Southern Democratic delegates decided to split from the Party and formed the "[[Dixiecrats]]," led by [[South Carolina]] governor [[Strom Thurmond]] (who, as a Senator, would later join the Republican Party). Over the next few years, many conservative Democrats in the "[[Solid South]]" drifted away from the party. By 1940 most northern Blacks had shifted to the Democratic Party due to its New Deal relief programs and support for civil rights.

The party's dramatic reversal on civil rights issues culminated when Democratic President [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] signed into law the [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]]. The new laws ended segregation and also ended the main argument Democrats had used to block Republican gains in the South (that is, only the Democrats could protect segregation). The South became competitive in presidential politics in the 1970s and 1980s, giving strong support to Republican Ronald Reagan and rejecting the liberal northern candidates. The Democrats responded by nominating Southerners (Carter in 1976 and 1980, Clinton in 1992 and 1996, Gore in 2000). Few southern states were won by Democratic presidential candidates from the North (Humphrey in 1968, McGovern in 1972, Mondale in 1984, Dukakis in 1988, Kerry in 2004). At the state and local level the Republicans made slow, steady gains, especially among upscale middle class whites and migrants from the North. By the 1990s the GOP was competitive at the state and local level throughout the South. The Democrats made gains in the west, converting California to a Democratic stronghold and gaining in fast-growing Arizona and Nevada. The Northeast became more and more a Democratic enclave, especially after 2006 when numerous Republican moderates were defeated for reelection. the Midwest remained a battleground. The Democrats made strong gains in Illinois, but slipped a little in Minnesota.
[[Image:Demfight1968.jpg|thumb|290px|By 1968 Democrats were bitterly fighting over Vietnam and the failures of the Great Society]]

==1968 to 1999==
The Democratic party split five ways in 1968 and became the minority party in presidential elections for decades; after 1964 they won a majority of the presidential vote only in 2008.

[[Image:Jimmy Carter.jpg|thumb|right|180px|Jimmy Carter was elected in 1976 and defeated in 1980.]]
In 1972, the Democrats nominated Sen. [[George McGovern]] (SD) as the presidential candidate on a platform which advocated, among other things, U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam and a guaranteed minimum income for all Americans. McGovern's forces at the national convention ousted Mayor [[Richard J. Daley]] and the entire Chicago delegation, replacing them with insurgents led by [[Jesse Jackson]]. After it became know that McGovern's running mate, [[Thomas Eagleton]], had received electric shock therapy, McGovern said he supported Eagleton "1000%" but he was soon forced to drop him and find a new running mate. With his campaign stalled for several weeks McGovern finally selected [[Sargent Shriver]], a Kennedy-in-law who was close to Mayor Daley. On July 14, 1972, McGovern appointed his campaign manager, Jean Westwood as the first woman chair of the Democratic National Committee. McGovern was defeated in a landslide by incumbent [[Richard Nixon]], winning only Massachusetts and Washington, D.C. The [[Watergate affair]] of 1973-74 made corruption a central issue, especially after [[Gerald Ford]] pardoned Nixon in September 1974. The Democrats made major gains in the 1974 off-year elections.

In 1976, mistrust of the administration, complicated by a combination of economic recession and inflation, sometimes called ''[[stagflation]]'', led to Ford's narrow defeat in 1976 by [[Jimmy Carter]], a former governor of Georgia.

Carter represented the total outsider, who promised honesty in government. He had served as a naval officer, a farmer, a state senator, and a one-term governor. His only experience with federal politics was when he chaired the Democratic National Committee's congressional and gubernatorial elections in 1974. Some of Carter's major accomplishments consisted of the creation of a national energy policy and the consolidation of governmental agencies, resulting in two new cabinet departments, the [[United States Department of Energy]] and the [[United States Department of Education]]. Carter also successfully deregulated the trucking, airline, rail, finance, communications, and oil industries, bolstered the [[social security]] system, and appointed record numbers of women and minorities to significant government and judicial posts. He also enacted strong legislation on environmental protection, through the expansion of the [[National Park Service]] in [[Alaska]], creating 103 million new acres of land. In foreign affairs, Carter's accomplishments consisted of the [[Camp David Accords]], the [[Panama Canal Treaties]], the creation of full diplomatic relations with the [[People's Republic of China]], and the negotiation of the [[SALT II]] Treaty. In addition, he championed human rights throughout the world and used human rights as the center of his administration's foreign policy.

Even with all of these successes, Carter failed to implement a national health plan or to reform the tax system, as he had promised in his campaign. Inflation was also on the rise. Abroad, the Iranians held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days, and Carter's diplomatic and military rescue attempts failed. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan later that year weakened the perception Americans had of Carter. Even though he had already been defeated for re-election, Carter fortunately was able to negotiate the release of every American hostage. They were lifted out of Iran minutes after Reagan was inaugurated and Carter served as Reagan's emissary to greet them when they arrived in Germany. In 1980, Carter defeated liberal champion [[Edward Kennedy]] to gain renomination, but lost to conservative [[Ronald Reagan]] by a landslide. The Democrats lost 12 Senate seats, and for the first time since 1954, the Republicans controlled the Senate. The House, however, remained in Democratic hands.

===1980s: Battling Reaganism===
Instrumental in the election of Republican [[Ronald Reagan]] in 1980, were Democrats who supported many conservative policies. Among legislators, one of the most prominent of these consevative Democrats was Georgia congressman and second chairman of the [[John Birch Society]], [[Larry McDonald]], who was a passenger on [[Korean Airlines Flight 007]] shot down by the Soviets near [[Moneron Island]] on Sept. 1, 1983. The "Reagan Democrats" were Democrats before the Reagan years, and afterward, but they voted for [[Ronald Reagan]] in 1980 and 1984 (and for [[George H. W. Bush]] in 1988), producing their landslide victories. They were mostly white ethnics in the Northeast who were attracted to Reagan's social conservatism on issues such as abortion, and to his strong foreign policy. They did not continue to vote Republican in 1992 or 1996, so the term fell into disuse except as a reference to the 1980s. The term is not used to describe southern whites who became permanent Republicans in presidential elections. Stanley Greenberg, a Democratic pollster analyzed white ethnic voters, largely unionized auto workers, in suburban Macomb County, Michigan, just north of Detroit. The county voted 63 percent for Kennedy in 1960 and 66 percent for Reagan in 1984. He concluded that Reagan Democrats no longer saw Democrats as champions of their middle class aspirations, but instead saw it as being a party working primarily for the benefit of others, especially African Americans and the very poor. Bill Clinton targeted the Reagan Democrats with considerable success in 1992 and 1996.

[[Image:Liberal1984.jpg|thumb|350px]] The failure to hold the Reagan Democrats and the white South led to the final collapse of the [[New Deal coalition]]. Reagan carried 49 states against former Vice President and Minnesota Senator [[Walter Mondale]], a New Deal stalwart, in 1984. Massachusetts Governor [[Michael Dukakis]], running not as a New Dealer but as an efficiency expert in public administration, lost by a landslide in 1988 to Vice President [[George H. W. Bush]].

In response to these landslide defeats, the [[Democratic Leadership Council]] was created. It worked to move the Party rightwards to the ideological center in order to recover some of the fundraising that had been lost to the Republicans due to corporate donors supporting Reagan. With the Party retaining left-of-center supporters as well as supporters holding moderate or conservative views on some issues, the Democrats became generally a "big tent" or "catch all party" with widespread appeal to most opponents of the Republicans.

===The South Becomes Republican===
In the century after the end of [[Reconstruction]] in 1877, the white South identified with Democratic Party. The Democrats' lock on power was so strong, the region was called the [[Solid South]]. The Republicans only controlled parts of the Appalachian mountains, but they sometimes did compete for statewide office in the border states. Before 1964, the southern Democrats saw their party as the defender of the southern way of life, which included a respect for states' rights and an appreciation for traditional southern values. They repeatedly warned against the aggressive designs of Northern liberals and Republicans, as well as civil rights activists whom they denounced as "outside agitators."

However, between 1964 and 2004, the Democratic Party's lock on the South was broken. The long-term cause had to do with the South becoming more like the rest of the nation. It could not long stand apart in terms of racial segregation. Modernization had brought factories, national businesses, and larger, more cosmopolitan cities to the South, as well as millions of migrants from the North and more opportunities for higher education. Meanwhile, the cotton and tobacco economy of the traditional rural South faded away, as former farmers commuted to factory jobs.

Integration and the civil rights movement caused enormous controversy in the white South, with many attacking it as a violation of states' rights. When segregation was outlawed by court order and by the Civil Rights acts of 1964 and 1965, a die-hard element resisted integration, led by Democratic governors [[Orval Faubus]] of Arkansas, [[Lester Maddox]] of Georgia, and, especially [[George Wallace]] of Alabama. These populist governors appealed to a less-educated, blue-collar electorate that on economic grounds favored the Democratic Party, but opposed desegregation. After 1965 most Southerners accepted integration (with the exception of public schools). Believing themselves betrayed by the Democratic Party, traditional white southerners joined the new middle-class and the Northern transplants in moving toward the Republican Party. Meanwhile, newly enfranchised Black voters began supporting Democratic candidates at the 80-90-percent levels, producing Democratic leaders such as [[Julian Bond]] and [[John Lewis]] of Georgia, and [[Barbara Jordan]] of Texas. Just as Martin Luther King had promised, integration had brought about a new day in Southern politics, freeing both blacks and whites from old hatreds and fears.

Using issues of cultural conservatism, especially opposition to abortion and homosexuality and support for school prayer, Republicans attracted strong majorities among evangelical Christians. They were nationwide, but strongest in the South; before to the 1980s they were largely apolitical. Exit polls in 2004 showed that Bush led Kerry by 70-30% among Southern whites, who comprised 71% of the voters. Kerry had a 90-9 lead among the 18% of Southern voters who were black. One third of the Southern voters said they were white evangelicals; they voted for Bush by 80-20.<ref> See the exit polls at [http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.3.html |date=[[2004-11-02]]|accessdate=2006-11-18]</ref>

===1990s===

In the 1990s the Democratic Party revived itself, in part by moving to the right on economic and social policy. President [[Bill Clinton]], who defeated the incumbent [[George H. W. Bush]] in 1992, implemented a balanced federal budget and [[welfare reform]] (cutting benefits and requiring many recipients to take jobs), traditionally conservative causes. Labor unions, which had been steadily losing membership since the 1960s, found they had also lost political clout inside the Democratic Party: Clinton enacted the [[NAFTA]] free trade agreement with Canada and Mexico over the strong objection of these labor unions, much to the disappointment of those on the left of the party. The [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican Party]] took control of both the House of Representatives and the United States Senate after the 1994 election. Clinton was impeached in 1998 and subsequently acquitted in 1999.

When the [[DLC]] attempted to move the Democratic agenda in favor of more centrist positions, prominent Democrats from both the centrist and conservative factions assumed leadership of the party and its direction. Some liberals and progressives felt alienated by the Democratic Party, which they felt had become unconcerned with the interests of the common people and left-wing issues in general. Some Democrats challenged the validity of such critiques, citing the Democratic role in pushing for progressive reforms.

==21st century==
===Election of 2000===
During the presidential election of 2000, the Democrats chose Vice President [[Al Gore]] to be the party's candidate for the presidency. Gore and [[George W. Bush]], the Republican candidate and son of former President George H.W. Bush, disagreed on a number of issues, including abortion, gun control, environmentalism, gay rights, tax cuts, foreign policy, public education, global warming, judicial appointments, and affirmative action. Nevertheless, Gore's affiliation with Clinton and the DLC caused critics—Green Party presidential candidate [[Ralph Nader]] in particular—to assert that Bush and Gore were too similar, especially on free trade, reductions in social welfare, and the death penalty. "We want to punish the Democrats, we want to hurt them, wound them," Nader's closest advisor said.<ref>Harry G. Levinem "Ralph Nader, Suicide Bomber." ''The Village Voice'' May 3, 2004 at [http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0418,levine,53179,1.html] </ref>

Gore won a popular plurality of over 500,000 votes over Bush, but lost in the electoral vote by four votes. In a close election anything can be decisive, but many angry Democrats blamed Nader's third-party spoiler role for Gore's defeat. Controversy plagued the election, and Gore largely dropped from politics for years; by 2005 however he was making speeches critical of Bush's foreign and environmental policies.

Despite Gore's close defeat, the Democrats gained five seats in the Senate (including the election of [[Hillary Clinton]] in New York), to turn a 55-45 Republican edge into a 50-50 split (with a Republican Vice President breaking a tie). However, when Republican Senator [[Jim Jeffords]] of Vermont decided in 2001 to become an independent and vote with the Democratic Caucus, the majority status shifted along with the seat, including control of the floor (by the Majority Leader) and control of all committee chairmanships. However, the Republicans regained their Senate majority with gains in 2002 and 2004, leaving the Democrats with only 44 seats, the fewest since the 1920s.

===2001-2003===
In the aftermath of the [[9-11 Attacks]], the nation's focus was changed to issues of national security. All but one Democrat<ref> Representative [[Barbara Lee]] of Texas</ref> joined the Republicans to authorize President Bush to invade invasion of Afghanistan and overthrow the Taliban. House leader [[Richard Gephardt]] and Senate leader [[Thomas Daschle]] pushed Democrats to vote for the [[USA PATRIOT Act]] and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The Democrats were split over entering Iraq in 2003 and increasingly expressed concerns about both the justification and progress of the [[War on Terrorism]], as well as the domestic effects, including supposed threats to civil rights and civil liberties from the PATRIOT Act. Senator [[Russ Feingold]] was the only Senator to vote against the act; it received more resistance when it came up for renewal, but was renewed in 2006.

In the wake of the financial fraud scandal of the [[Enron Corporation]] and other corporations, Congressional Democrats pushed for a legal overhaul of business accounting with the intention of preventing further accounting fraud. This led to the bipartisan [[Sarbanes-Oxley Act]] in 2002. Economic issues did not work well in 2002, as the Democrats lost a few seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. They lost three seats in the Senate. While Democrats gained governorships in New Mexico (where [[Bill Richardson]] was elected), Arizona ([[Janet Napolitano]]) and Wyoming ([[Dave Freudenthal]]), other Democrats lost governorships in South Carolina ([[Jim Hodges]]), Alabama ([[Don Siegelman]]) and, for the first time in more than a century, Georgia ([[Roy Barnes]]). The election led to another round of soul searching about the party's narrowing base. The party's miseries mounted in 2003, when a voter recall unseated their unpopular governor of California, [[Gray Davis]], and replaced him which a charismatic liberal Republican [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]]. By the end of 2003 the four largest states had Republican governors: California, Texas, New York and Florida.

===Election of 2004===
The 2004 campaign began in late 2002, when Gore said he would not run again. [[Howard Dean]], former Governor of Vermont, an opponent of the war and a critic of the Democratic establishment, was the front-runner leading into the Democratic primaries. Dean had immense grassroots support, especially from the left wing of the party. Massachusetts Senator [[John Kerry]], a more centrist figure with heavy support from the [[Democratic Leadership Council]], was nominated because he was seen as more "electable" than Dean. Democrats moved to populist anti-business positions that denounced free trade and the [[NAFTA]] agreement. The party rhetoric attacked the Bush administration rather than propose alternative programs.

In the end, Kerry lost both the popular vote (by 3 million out of over 120 million votes cast) and the [[Electoral College]]. Republicans also gained four seats in the Senate and three seats in the House of Representatives, and for the first time since 1952, the Democratic leader of the Senate lost re-election. In the end, there were 3,660 Democratic state legislators across the nation to the Republicans' 3,557. Democrats gained governorships in Louisiana, New Hampshire and Montana. However, they lost the governorship of Missouri and a legislative majority in Georgia, which had long been a Democratic stronghold.

There were many reasons for the defeat. After the election most analysts concluded that Kerry was a poor campaigner.<ref>Evan Thomas and Staff of Newsweek,''Election 2004: How Bush Won and What You Can Expect in the Future''(2005)</ref> A group of Vietnam veterans opposed to Kerry called the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" undercut Kerry's use of his military past as a campaign strategy. Kerry was unable to reconcile his initial support of the [[Iraq War]] with his opposition to the war in 2004, or manage the deep split in the Democratic Party between those who favored and opposed the war. Republicans ran thousands of television commercials to argue that Kerry had flip-flopped on Iraq. When Kerry's home state of Massachusetts legalized same-sex marriage, the issue split liberal and conservative Democrats and independents (Kerry publicly stated throughout his campaign that he opposed same sex marriage, but favored civil unions). Republicans exploited the same-sex marriage issue by promoting ballot initiatives in 11 states that brought conservatives to the polls in large numbers; all 11 initiatives passed. Some Democrats argued that flaws in vote-counting systems may also have played a role in Kerry's defeat in Ohio. Other factors include a healthy job market, a rising stock market, strong home sales, and low unemployment.

After the 2004 election, prominent Democrats began to rethink the party's direction, and a variety of strategies for moving forward were voiced. Some Democrats proposed moving towards the right; others demanded that the party move more to the left and become a stronger opposition party. . Rethinking the party's position on gun control became a matter of discussion, brought up by [[Howard Dean]], [[Bill Richardson]], [[Brian Schweitzer]] and other Democrats who had won governorships in states where Second Amendment rights were important to many voters.

===2005 - 2007===
These debates were reflected in the 2005 campaign for Chairman of the [[Democratic National Committee]], which [[Howard Dean]] won. He sought to move the Democratic strategy away from the establishment, and bolster support for the party's state organizations, even in Red states.

When the 109th Congress convened in 2005, [[Harry Reid]], the new Senate Minority Leader, tried to convince the Democratic Senators to vote more as a bloc on important issues; he forced the Republicans to abandon their push for privatization of Social Security. In 2005, the Democrats retained their governorships in Virginia and New Jersey, electing [[Tim Kaine]] and [[Jon Corzine]], respectively. However, the party lost the mayoral race in New York City, a Democratic stronghold, for the fourth straight time.

In 2006, with scandals involving Republican lobbyist [[Jack Abramoff]], as well as GOP House leader [[Tom DeLay]], Ohio GOP governor [[Bob Taft]] and others, the Democrats used the slogan "Culture of corruption." Negative public opinion on the war in Iraq, along with widespread dissatisfaction among conservatives over government spending, dragged President Bush's job approval ratings down to the lowest levels of his presidency. To win control the Democrats had to add 15 seats in the House (they added 30), and 6 in the Senate (they added 6).

The Democratic Party's electoral success has been attributed to running relatively conservative Democrats in close seats, such as the Senate races in Virginia, Pennsylvania and Montana. <ref> Dewan Shaila and Anne E. Kornblut, "In Key House Races, Democrats Run to the Right," ''New York Times,'' 2006-10-30; but compare Rick Perlstein, "Who deserves credit for the Democratic comeback?" ''The New Republic'' 2006-11-08]] at [https://ssl.tnr.com/p/docsub.mhtml?i=w061106&s=perlstein110806] </ref> Exit polling suggested that corruption was a key issue for many voters.<ref>CNN, "Corruption named as key issue by voters in exit polls," 2006-11-08 at [http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/07/election.exitpolls/] </ref>

In 2006 Democrats gained a majority of governorships and made gains in many state legislatures. No Democratic incumbent was defeated in any major race.
===2007-2010===
[[File:Obama_approval_index_december_22_2009.jpg‎|thumb|250px]]
House Democrats chose Rep. [[Nancy Pelosi]] of California for Speaker, the first woman ever, but rejected her choice for Majority Leader. Senate Democrats promoted Harry Reid to Majority Leader. Neither have been very effective.

The presidential campaign of 2008 featured a remarkable duel between Obama--the first major black candidate, and [[Hillary Clinton]], the first major woman contender. Obama won with his charismatic oratory and his highly efficient fund-raising and strong organization in the caucus states, while Clinton went downscale to pick up big majorities among poor whites and Hispanics. The contest between Obama and GOP nominee [[John McCain]] was very close until September, when the collapse of the financial system soured the voters on the GOP.

The [[Obama Administration]] got off to a fast start in 2009, especially in vigorous efforts to combat the [[Recession of 2008]] with heavy new stimulus spending, massive loans to banks, increased regulation, and deep intervention in the automobile industry. All those policies were begun by Bush, and had failed to reverse the decline of the economy in late 2008. Whether they will now succeed remains an open question, with the GOP now voting solidly against them and some conservatives like [[Rush Limbaugh]] hoping that the Democrats will fail badly and that the people will again turn to the Republican party. The Democratic Party is feeling the sting from the opposition and many Democrats are beginning to question their own leadership. Liberals are disenchanted with Obama's hawkish position on the [[Afghanistan War]]. The health care reform that consumed most of 2009 remains unsettled, as public opinion has turned against it. Environmentalists now seem resigned to the failure of a [[cap and trade]] program to reduce CO2 emissions. Most of all the recession drags on. The stimulus bill was passed quickly in Feb. 2009 over almost unanimous GOP opposition, but despite promises of "shovel ready" projects, most of the money has not been spent a year later and the economy remains in the doldrums.

The elections in Nov. 2009 in New Jersey and Virginia went badly for the Democrats, as the GOP gained both governorships and many local races, not to mention the Democrats' fifth straight loss for the mayoralty of New York City.

see [[2010 Midterm Elections]]

==Symbols==
The most common symbol for the party is the donkey, although the party itself never officially adopted this symbol.<ref>[http://www.democrats.org/a/2005/06/history_of_the.php History of the Democratic Donkey]. </ref> Some historians suggest the jackass was born 1828 when Jackson was sometimes called a jackass by his opponents as a play on his name. A political cartoon depicting Jackson riding and directing a donkey (representing the Democratic Party) was published in 1837. A political cartoon by [[Thomas Nast]] in an 1870 revived the donkey as a symbol for the Democratic Party. Cartoonists ever since have followed Nast and used the donkey to represent the Democrats, and the elephant to represent the Republicans.

In the early 20th century, the traditional symbol of the Democratic Party in many states was the rooster, as opposed to the Republican eagle.

There is no official color, but since election night 2000 blue has become the identification color of the Democratic Party for maps, while the red has become the color of the Republicans. Increasingly blue is used by Democrats for promotions (e.g BuyBlue, BlueFund) and by the party itself, which in 2006 unveiled the "Red to Blue Program" to support Democratic candidates running against Republican incumbents in the 2006 midterm election.

[[Jefferson-Jackson Day]] annual fundraising celebrations are held by local chapters of the Democratic Party.

The song "[[Happy Days Are Here Again]]" is the unofficial song of the Democratic Party. It was used prominently when Roosevelt was nominated for president at the 1932 Democratic National Convention and remains a sentimental favorite for Democrats today. During the [[Bill Clinton|Clinton]] era, the [[Fleetwood Mac]] song "Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow" became a popular song at Democratic events, reflecting the growing prominence of Baby Boomers in the party.

==Democratic Presidents==
* [[Andrew Jackson]] (1829-1837)
* [[Martin Van Buren]] (1837-1841)
* [[James K. Polk]] (1845-1849)
* [[Franklin Pierce]] (1853-1857)
* [[James Buchanan]] (1857-1861)
* [[Grover Cleveland]] (1885-1889) (1893-1897)
* [[Woodrow Wilson]] (1913-1921)
* [[Franklin Roosevelt]] (1933-1945)
* [[Harry S Truman]] (1945-1953)
* [[John F. Kennedy]] (1961-1963)
* [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] (1963-1969)
* [[Jimmy Carter]] (1977-1981)
* [[Bill Clinton]] (1993-2001)
* [[Barack Obama]] (2009 - Present)

==See also==
*[[Previous Breaking News/Democrats|Articles about '''Democrats''' from previous "Breaking News"]]
*[[Gestapo care]]

==Bibliography==
===Current===
*Barone, Michael, and Grant Ujifusa, ''The Almanac of American Politics 2008: The Senators, the Representatives and the Governors: Their Records and Election Results, Their States and Districts'' (2007) covers all the live politicians with amazing detail. New edition every two years since 1975.
* Brownstein, Ronald. ''The Second Civil War: How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America''(2007)
* Crane, Michael. ''The Political Junkie Handbook: The Definitive Reference Books on Politics'' (2004) covers all the major issues explaining the parties' positions
*Sabato, Larry J. ''Divided States of America: The Slash and Burn Politics of the 2004 Presidential Election'' (2005).
*Sabato, Larry J. ed. ''The Sixth Year Itch: The Rise and Fall of the George W. Bush Presidency'' (1907), in-depth essays by scholars on key states in 2006
* Sabato, Larry J., and Howard R. Ernst eds. ''Political Parties and Elections'' (2007), 540pp; an encyclopedia with 450 entries by scholars; focus is 1945 to present
* Sabato, Larry J. and Bruce Larson. ''The Party's Just Begun: Shaping Political Parties for America's Future'' (2001) textbook.
* Shafer, Byron E. and Anthony J. Badger, eds. ''Contesting Democracy: Substance and Structure in American Political History, 1775-2000'' (2001), long essays by specialists on each time period
* Shafer, Byron and Richard Johnston. ''The End of Southern Exceptionalism'' (2006), uses statistical election data & polls to argue GOP growth was primarily a response to economic change
===Historical===
* ''American National Biography'' (20 volumes, 1999) covers all politicians no longer alive; online and paper copies at many academic libraries.
* Jensen, Richard. ''Grass Roots Politics: Parties, Issues, and Voters, 1854-1983'' (1983) [http://www.questia.com/library/book/grass-roots-politics-parties-issues-and-voters-1854-1983-by-christopher-c-gibbs-richard-j-jensen-steven-l-piott.jsp online edition]; survey by conservative scholar, with primary sources
* Kennedy, David M. ''Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945'' (2001), synthesis by leading scholar; Pulitzer prize [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=52284041 online edition]
* Kleppner, Paul et al. ''The Evolution of American Electoral Systems'' (1983), essays by scholars (some of them conservatives), 1790s to 1980s.
* Kleppner, Paul. ''The Third Electoral System 1853-1892: Parties, Voters, and Political Cultures'' (1979), analysis of voting behavior, with emphasis on region, ethnicity, religion and class. [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=24451028 online edition]
* Ling, Peter J. ''The Democratic Party: A Photographic History'' (2003).
* Patterson, James T. ''Grand Expectations: The United States, 1945-1974'' (1997) synthesis by leading scholar. [http://www.amazon.com/Grand-Expectations-United-1945-1974-History/dp/0195117972/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1211911625&sr=1-2 excerpt and text search]
* Patterson, James T. ''Restless Giant: The United States from Watergate to Bush vs. Gore'' (2005) synthesis by leading scholar. [http://www.amazon.com/Restless-Giant-United-Watergate-History/dp/0195305221/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1211911625&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]
* Ritchie, Donald A. ''Electing FDR: The New Deal Campaign of 1932'' (2007) [http://www.amazon.com/Electing-FDR-Campaign-Presidential-Elections/dp/0700615504/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1195784762&sr=8-2 excerpt and text search]
* Rutland, Robert Allen. ''The Democrats: From Jefferson to Clinton'' (1995).
* Shafer, Byron E. and Anthony J. Badger, eds. ''Contesting Democracy: Substance and Structure in American Political History, 1775-2000'' (2001), most recent collection of new essays by specialists on each time period:
**includes: "State Development in the Early Republic: 1775–1840" by Ronald P. Formisano; "The Nationalization and Racialization of American Politics: 1790–1840" by David Waldstreicher; "'To One or Another of These Parties Every Man Belongs;": 1820–1865 by Joel H. Silbey; "Change and Continuity in the Party Period: 1835–1885" by Michael F. Holt; "The Transformation of American Politics: 1865–1910" by Peter H. Argersinger; "Democracy, Republicanism, and Efficiency: 1885–1930" by Richard Jensen; "The Limits of Federal Power and Social Policy: 1910–1955" by Anthony J. Badger; "The Rise of Rights and Rights Consciousness: 1930–1980" by James T. Patterson, Brown University; and "Economic Growth, Issue Evolution, and Divided Government: 1955–2000" by Byron E. Shafer
* Schlisinger, Galbraith. ''Of the People: The 200 Year History of the Democratic Party'' (1992)
* Sundquist, James L. ''Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and Realignment of Political Parties in the United States'', (1983) [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=29223022 online edition
* Wilentz, Sean. ''The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln'' (2005), detailed synthesis by a leading liberal scholar. [http://www.amazon.com/Rise-American-Democracy-Jefferson-Lincoln/dp/0393058204/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1195784940&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search]
* Witcover, Jules. ''Party of the People: A History of the Democrats'' (2003)
* Schlesinger, Arthur Meier, Jr. ed. ''History of American Presidential Elections, 1789-2000'' (various multivolume editions, latest is 2001). For each election includes a short history by a leading scholar and a selection of primary documents.

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://www.democrats.org/ Democratic Party Official Site]
*[http://www.demconvention.com/assets/downloads/2008-Democratic-Platform-final.pdf 2008 Democratic Platform (pdf download)]

[[Category:United States Political Organizations]]
[[Category:United States Political Parties]]
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
[[Category:Progressive Era]]
[[Category:Gilded Age]]
[[Category:New Deal]]
[[Category:Reagan Era]]
[[Category:1960s]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Liberals]]
[[category:Jacksonian Democracy]]

Led Zeppelin

2010-08-05T19:52:20Z

ChrisGT90: Added references section

[[Image:LedZeppelin.jpg|thumb|right|Led Zeppelin: Left to right John Bonham, Robert Plant, Jimmy Page, John Paul Jones]]
'''Led Zeppelin''' were a British rock group formed in 1968 by guitarist Jimmy Page, along with other founding members Robert Plant (vocals), John Paul Jones (bass guitar and keyboards) and John Bonham (drums). They are one of the most well-known bands in the history of rock and roll and were instrumental in the creation of the heavy metal and hard-rock subgenres.<ref name="Rock Music History">Tim Grierson, "[http://rock.about.com/od/rockmusic101/a/RockHistory.htm What Is Rock Music? A Brief History of Rock Music]", ''[[About.com]]''</ref>

The band was formed by Page after his previous band, [[The Yardbirds]], split up with outstanding contractual obligations to play a number of concerts. They were notoriously private and spurned the publicity machine usually favored by groups. They refused to release singles to promote their albums in the UK and rarely made television appearances (which were curtailed after the release of the first album), preferring instead to tour extensively.

Led Zeppelin's eponymous [[Led Zeppelin (album)|first album]] (1969) drew heavily on their blues background and drew critical acclaim.

Their second album, simply called ''[[Led Zeppelin II]]'' (1969), placed the band firmly in the vanguard of the heavy rock movement and featured a track which became their first US Number 1, "[[Whole Lotta Love]]".

The third album, ''[[Led Zeppelin III]]'' (1970), featured a more acoustic sound and drew on folk influences, but still had room for hard rock in "Immigrant Song" and the blues in "Since I've Been Loving You".

Their [[Led Zeppelin IV|fourth album]] (1971) which was untitled and did not feature the band on the cover, became known as ''Led Zeppelin IV'' or ''Four Symbols'' (the "symbols" being four runic symbols on the inside cover, one associated with each member of the band). This album launched Led Zeppelin into a new level as the track "[[Stairway to Heaven]]" became the most requested track on US radio ever.

''Houses of the Holy'' (1973) broadened the scope of the band even further with the reggae-influenced "D'Yer Mak'er" and the mysterious , lingering "No Quarter".

After the release of ''Houses of the Holy'' the band's next project was the mostly live concert film, ''The Song remains the Same'', named after a track on that album and featuring footage of the Madison Square Garden concerts from their 1973 tour.

''Physical Graffiti'' (1975) was a double album that covered many themes and included "[[Kashmir (song)|Kashmir]]". It was followed by ''Presence'' (1976), their only album not to feature any keyboard. Their final album, ''In Through the Out Door'', was released in 1979.

In 1979 Led Zeppelin played their two largest concerts, in front of 400,000 people at the Knebworth Festival. Parts of the first Knebworth concert later featured on the Led Zeppelin DVD released in 2002, which also included footage from a show at the Royal Albert Hall in London from 1970 and shows at Madison Square Garden and Earls Court from 1973 and 1975 respectively.

After playing a short European tour in the summer of 1980, the band began preparing for a longer North American tour when John Bonham suddenly died due to overconsumption of alcohol. The band subsequently broke up, as Plant, Page, and Jones each pursued solo careers to varying degrees of success. The three surviving members would reunite in 1985 for the [[Live Aid]] concert, in 1988 for the Atlantic Records 40th Anniversary concert, and in 1995 for their induction into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Page and Plant also reunited (without Jones) to record an album covering Led Zeppelin songs, and an album of originals.

The band reformed (with Bonham's son Jason replacing his father on drums) in 2007 to perform at the Ahmet Ertegun Tribute Concert at the O2 Arena in London. Tickets were priced at £125 ($250) and were alloted via a lottery system. Approximately 1 million people applied to see the band perform in the 20,000 capacity venue. There is currently speculation (fueled partly by comments made by Page and Jason Bonham) that the band may embark on a tour after Plant has completed his current touring schedule with American bluegrass musician Alison Krauss in support of their album ''Raising Sand'' (2007). Further speculation was fueled when Jimmy Page and John Paul Jones appeared on stage during the encore of a Foo Fighters gig at Wembley Stadium, London, to play Zeppelin classic ''Rock and Roll''.

===Live Albums===
*''[[The Song Remains the Same (Soundtrack)|The Song Remains the Same]]'' (1975)
*''[[BBC Sessions (Led Zeppelin)|BBC Sessions]]'' (1997, recorded 1969 and 1971)
*''[[How the West Was Won (album)|How the West Was Won]]'' (2003, recorded 1972)

===Compilations===
*''[[Coda (Led Zeppelin album)|Coda]]'' (1981)
*''[[Remasters (Compilation)]]'' (1990)

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Rock Bands]]

User talk:ChrisGT90

2010-08-03T04:22:46Z

ChrisGT90:

==Why is it..==
..that you appear to be a clone of my outlooks? I sure do hope you aren't following the [[Liberal|their]] footsteps. [[User:JonG|~]] [[User_talk:JonG|JonG]] [[Special:Contributions/JonG|~]] 21:01, 2 June 2010 (EDT)
:You mean our mutual interest in minor grammar/formatting fixes? Sometimes I don't know what information is best to include in an article, or how to say it, or where it should be, but I can recognize an incorrect sentence when I see one. I don't plan on just doing that though; I started an article on [[Pascal's triangle]]. I haven't seen your page before. Maybe we just have a similar understanding of what we do well. [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 21:51, 2 June 2010 (EDT)

You can edit [[liberal myths]] directly now. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:53, 29 June 2010 (EDT)
:Thank you. [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 12:58, 29 June 2010 (EDT)

== Edits ==

Do not, under any circumstances, undo the edits of the FOUNDER AND OWNER OF THE SITE! [[User:JacobB|JacobB]][[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]] 21:01, 21 July 2010 (EDT)
:Andy is a smart man, but no human is perfect. God is infallible, we are not. Only by recognizing our errors can we reach the truth. [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 13:13, 27 July 2010 (EDT)
::I agree, ChrisGT90, with your appraisal of the state of man. If you read our Conservapedia Guidelines, however, you will see ''that is an instruction'', not an observation on the part of Jacob. If you have issues with Mr. Schlafly's edits, or those of any Administrator, take it up on the discussion page before reverting. Thanks. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 16:34, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

== Tomorrow song ==

Conservatives prefer forward-looking approaches. What do you think it is about the lyrics to the song that you deleted that isn't conservative?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:58, 21 July 2010 (EDT)
:It's a viewpoint that could apply to absolutely anybody: conservatives, liberals, anarchists, fascists, or anyone else. Hitler could have used the song (if it had been around the time) -- "Life may stink now, but we'll get rid of all these Jews and then have a glorious future." Conservatives do look forward, but so does everyone. It does not express a value that is uniquely conservative.
:Also, the band ''reunited'' to perform the song live for Bill Clinton's inaugural ball. If it were truly a conservative song, the band wouldn't have performed it to celebrate a Democrat's victory. [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 13:11, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

::I disagree that all ideologies view and emphasize the future the same way. Communists, for example, are notorious for grinding everything to a halt and demanding full worship of their current and prior leaders. The New Testament is the opposite: it focuses heavily on the future, an eternal one at that.

::That said, I'm open to a more detailed study of the lyrics ... provided we can first agree that different ideologies do prioritize and emphasize the future differently.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:27, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

:::I think we'll have to disagree on this one. I'm sure that every political party has platformed on the future. Even in campaigning candidates say "If I'm elected..." which is about the future, albeit very near. While Communists may encourage worship of the present leader, much of their promises to the people are about the way things will be in the future.
:::In our society, every bit of criticism or praise is focused on our current leaders (kind of like those Communists), but their promises are about things that will come to fruition ''someday''. If anything, it seems liberals would fit the song's ideas better than conservatives: conservatives enact policies that make sense ''now'', while liberals try to preempt nonexistent threats like global warming with policies that aren't necessary immediately, but supposedly are necessary to "ensure our future," or some made up excuse like that.
:::Here are the lyrics from the song: [[http://www.lyricsfreak.com/f/fleetwood+mac/dont+stop_20054276.html]]. It seems to be about an incident in a relationship. While I see how this song could be applied to conservative values, I don't see anything that prevents it being applied just as well to most value systems. [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 22:42, 2 August 2010 (EDT)

:::: Your link is broken. Perhaps the parenthesis is out of place? In response to your comments, communist China looks very much to the past, and places great emphasis on it.

:::: I don't see how all ideologies could possibly emphasize the future versus the past in exactly the same way. To take just one conservative insight, the [[Laffer Curve]], it points out how future behavior changes to increase government revenue when taxes are cuts. Many liberals are unable to grasp this given their mindset that places less emphasis on future behavior.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:01, 2 August 2010 (EDT)

::::: There was an extra parenthesis at the end. The link is fixed now. As far as the future is concerned, it seems that parties emphasize whatever aspect of the future they need to in order to sway the public to their side. Conservatives may point out the Laffer Curve as it relates to the future, while liberals may place emphasis on something else in the future. (They are '''very''' much concerned about the future when it comes to the environment.) Whether the way they look at the future is right or wrong is irrelevant, the fact is that both groups look to the future in the ways that they believe are best.

::::: In regards to Communist China looking to the past, do you not draw great insight from the Bible? I personally hold the founding fathers in very high esteem, they are figures from the past as well. Looking into the past offers great insights, and shouldn't be ignored. Whether they praise the past or simply examine it depends on who's spinning the story.

::::: Every party/affiliation/faith/value system will look into the past. You can spin it any way want, but it's something all of them do. They may look at different aspects of the past, but all of them value the past. Every party/affiliation/faith/value system also seeks to improve the future. That, too, is something you can spin any way you want to. Like they do with the past, they will look at different aspects of the future, and you can devalue certain aspects until you decide that a particular groups view of the future is not worthwhile, but that doesn't change the fact that they '''are''' looking to the future. They may not look to the future in the right way, but they're still looking there. Every political organization ostensibly exists to change the future -- nobody tries to improve people's lives by changing the past. Whether that's what they actually do or not is not another story, but every system can still claim that "looking to the future" is one of their core values.

::::: As for the song, just leave it in the list. I don't care anymore. [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 00:22, 3 August 2010 (EDT)

User talk:ChrisGT90

2010-08-03T02:42:58Z

ChrisGT90: /* Tomorrow song */

Gulf of Mexico oil spill

2010-08-03T02:26:07Z

ChrisGT90: I think this conveys that 2.5 million was not the initial estimate while still sounding like the estimate was made during the spill. Revert this if it's not good.

[[File:Dispersants spraying.jpg|right|300px|thumb|President Obama directed the [[United States Coast Guard]] to dump [[toxic]] disperants into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] despite known health hazards to humans and wildlife. [http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/] ]]The '''Gulf of Mexico oil spill''' began on 20 April 2010 when the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil drilling rig operated by [[BP]] (known as British Petroleum until 2000) exploded and sank.<ref>[http://www.businessinsider.com/gulf-of-mexico-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-2010-4 Here's The Questions You Should Be Asking About The Gulf Of Mexico Oil Spill]</ref> Oil began leaking at a rate eventually estimated at 2.5 million gallons per day, resulting in massive environmental degradation.<ref>[http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hSaoIddZwUtk-BTcIDuy6AjaHwSgD9GBV0GO0 Scientists: Oil leaking up to 2.52M gallons daily]</ref> The blowout also killed eleven workers. Despite the known [[toxic]]ity of the dispersant Corexit, the [[Obama administration]] dumped millions of gallons of the hazardous chemical into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] with C-130 aircraft provided by the [[U.S. Coast Guard]]<ref>http://vodpod.com/watch/3962219-confirmed-corexit-being-sprayed-from-coast-guard-planes</ref>and the [[Air Force]].<ref>http://bpoilslick.blogspot.com/2010/07/us-air-force-sprays-corexit-from-plane.html</ref>

On 31 March 2010 [[President Obama]] announced a plan for exploitation of offshore oil reserves during a speech at Andrews Air Force Base outside [[Washington, D.C.]]<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/user/AssociatedPress#p/u/6/mA7RAfHN-wo Obama Lifts Ban on Offshore Drilling,] ''[[Associated Press]],'' 31 March 2010. Retrieved from [[Youtube]] 9 May 2010.</ref> The President's actions have been labeled, "a decision to endanger our coastal [[ecosystem]]s with the risk of catastrophic oil spills."<ref>[http://members.greenpeace.org/blog/greenpeaceusa_blog/2010/04/30/president_obama_committed_to_endangering President Obama must reinstate moratorium on offshore drilling,] [[Greenpeace]] USA blogs, 30 Apr 2010.</ref> Defending the decision, the President remarked "oil rigs today generally don’t cause spills. They are technologically very advanced."<ref>White House Press Release, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-a-discussion-jobs-and-economy-charlotte-north-carolina Remarks by the President in a Discussion on Jobs and the Economy in Charlotte, North Carolina,] Office of the Press Secretary, April 02, 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 3 May 2010.</ref><ref>Video: [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/04/29/flashback_obama_says_oil_rigs_today_dont_generally_cause_spills.html Obama Says "Oil Rigs Today Don't Generally Cause Spills"], 2 April 2010. Retrieved from RealClearPolitics.com 12 May 2010.</ref>

Since January 2009 the [[Obama administration]] approved 346 oil drilling plans without securing permits required by law from the [[federal]] agency that assesses environmental impacts.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?partner=rss&emc=rss U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits,] Ian Urbina, ''New York Times'', 13 May 2010. Retrieved 28 May 2010.</ref> [[President Barack Obama]] has been widely criticized for an unprepared and bungled response, most notably from former supporters.
 
{{cquote|'''''<big>We're in charge, but BP is responsible.</big>''''' -- '''Barack Obama, news conference of 5/27/2010'''<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/27/obama-federal-government-charge-oil-spill-response/ Obama news conference, 5/27/10]</ref>}}

As of July 15, BP announced that the gushing well had been successfully capped, although more than half of the oil which had already been spilled remains in the gulf. To avoid a pressure build-up, a relief well will have to be drilled.

==The Obama plan ==
[[File:OCS Eastern Gulf of Mexico Strategy.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Map of expanded areas of offshore oil drilling authorized by President Obama on 31 March 2010.<ref>[http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/2010/04/01/obama-offshore-oil-drilling-details.htm Obama Offshore Oil Drilling Details,] 1 April 2010. Retrieved from About.com Guide to US Government Info 16 May 2010.</ref> ''Source: United States Department of Interior.'']]
Obama called for expanded development and production throughout the [[Gulf of Mexico]]. The [[Department of Interior]]'s [[Minerals Management Service]] (MMS) estimates that the Gulf of Mexico contains 36-41.5 billion barrels of oil and 161-207 trillion cubic feet of natural gas resources. According a DOI press release, Obama's plan would "expand oil and gas development and exploration" while "protecting fisheries, [[tourism]], and places off U.S. coasts that are not appropriate for development."<ref>[http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/2010_03_31_release.cfm Department of Interior Press Release,] 31 March 2010.</ref>

The ''[[Associated Press]]'' has reported on the role ex-government regulators play in [[lobby]]ing and influence; the chief of staff of the MSS's Gulf of Mexico region once stated that deep water drilling had "few or no regulations or standards."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/a-2649320~INFLUENCE_GAME__Govt_regulators_hired_by_companies.html INFLUENCE GAME: Govt regulators hired by companies,] Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010. Retrieved from examiner.com 26 May 2010.</ref> Two years later the senior official left his job in the MMS to work for BP.<ref>Ibid.</ref> During President Obama's first year in office, as BP's regulatory compliance and environmental manager, the ex-MMS official lobbied the U.S. Ocean Policy Task Force to "carefully weigh policies that may establish exclusionary zones" or "disrupt the MMS leasing program," according to a statement posted at whitehouse.gov.<ref>Influence Game, Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010.</ref> He further stated that BP wanted access to off-limit areas such as the eastern [[Gulf of Mexico]]<ref>Ibid.</ref> which President Obama approved in March 2010.

Total U.S. offshore [[crude oil]] production in 2009 was 1.7 million barrels a day, of which 1.6 million barrels a day came from the U.S. section of the Gulf of Mexico.<ref>[http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/info_glance/petroleum.html Energy Information Administration.]</ref>

According to the ''New York Times'', President Obama "said several times during his [[Barack Hussein Obama 2008 Presidential campaign|presidential campaign]] that he supported expanded offshore drilling. He noted in his [[State of the Union]] address<ref>[http://www.c-span.org/Executive/State-of-the-Union.aspx Barack Obama State of the Union Address 2010]. Retrieved from [[C-SPAN]].org 15 May 2010.</ref> in January [2010] that weaning the country from imported oil would require “tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development.”<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/science/earth/31energy.html Obama to Open Offshore Areas to Oil Drilling for First Time,] John M. Broder, ''[[New York Times]]'', March 30, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/03/obama_clears_way_for_oil_drill.html Obama clears way for oil drilling off U.S. coasts], Associated Press, March 31, 2010, Retrieved from nola.com 8 May 2010.</ref>

Nobel Laureate in Economics, Dr. [[Paul Krugman]],<ref>[http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2008/ Economics 2008.] Retrieved from Nobel.org 10 May 2010.</ref> who has been highly critical of Obama [[Obama administration corporate bailouts|economic policy]]<ref>[http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090331151429.aspx Krugman Garners Newsweek Cover for Left-Wing Criticism of [[Obamunism|Obamanomics,]] ] Julia A. Seymour, ''Business & Media Institute'', 3/31/09.</ref> in his regular ''New York Times'' column, ''Conscience of a Liberal'' wrote a piece entitled "The oil spill is Obama's fault," and stated "that’s not what I believe....The only question is what the story will be."<ref>[http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/the-oil-spill-is-obamas-fault/?src=twt&twt=NytimesKrugman The Oil Spill Is Obama’s Fault,] Paul Krugman, ''New York Times '' Op-Ed, 30 April 2010.</ref> When questioned about the Obama regulators "cozy relationship" with oil companies the president responded, "absolutely I take responsibility for that."<ref>[http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-gulf-oil-spill Remarks by President Obama on the Gulf Oil Spill,] Office of the Press Secretary, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 29 May 2010.</ref>
=== Obama administration asks Court to allow BP drilling in the Gulf of Mexico ===

Less than four months after [[President Barack Obama]] took office a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. found that the U.S. Government was unprepared for a major spill at sea, relying on an "irrational" environmental analysis of the risks of offshore drilling. The Obama administration urged the court to revisit the decision. In its arguments to the court, the Obama administration said that the loss of royalties on the oil, estimated at almost $10 billion, "may have significant financial consequences for the federal government."

Among the existing leases was the Lease Sale #206. That deal included BP's acquisition, for $34 million, of the acreage encompassing the Deep Water Horizons well.

A day after the administration's petition, the industry's main lobbying group, the American Petroleum Institute, made its own case echoing the government's arguments. "The significance of [Gulf of Mexico] activities under the five-year program cannot be overstated," the API argued.

Secretary [[Ken Salazar]] expressed confidence that problems within the [[Minerals Management Service]] that led to poor oversight of offshore drilling were resolved. In September 2009, in testimony before the House Natural Resources Committee, Salazar listed steps he had taken to make sure problems "don't occur in the future."

In [[Senate]] hearings held in mid-November 2009, Obama MMS Deputy Director Walter Cruickshank assured the Committee panel fears of containing a catastrophic blowout were misplaced, saying the U.S. had "what we believe is the most aggressive oil spill contingency planning...in the world."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704699604575342843359124882.html</ref>

=== Approval of BP's response plan ===
The [[Obama administration]] accepted and approved BP's regional oil spill response plan for the [[Gulf of Mexico]] dated 30 June 2009<ref>[http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1351 Did anyone actually read BP's oil spill response plan?] Walruses and Seals, Non-Existent Equipment Lists and Other Fanciful References, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from peer.org 19 June 2010.</ref> and covered all the company’s operations in the Gulf. The plan lists
:*“Sea Lions, Seals, Sea Otters [and] [[Walrus]]es” as “Sensitive Biological Resources” in the Gulf, suggesting that portions were cribbed from previous [[Arctic]] exploratory planning;
:* Gives a web site for a [[Japan]]ese home shopping site as the link to one of its “primary equipment providers for BP in the Gulf of Mexico Region [for] rapid deployment of spill response resources on a 24 hour, 7 days a week basis;” and
:* Directs its media spokespeople to never make “promises that [[property]], [[ecology]], or anything else will be restored to normal.”<ref>http://www.mms.gov/DeepwaterHorizon/BP_Regional_OSRP_Redactedv2.pdf</ref>

The government approved plan made no mention about tracking sub-surface oil plumes from deepwater blowouts or preventing [[disease]] ([[virus]]es, [[bacteria]], etc.) transmission to captured [[animal]]s in rehabilitation facilities.

=== British Petroleum ===
During the first 100 days of the [[Obama administration]], the Minerals Management Service ([[MMS]]) of the [[Department of the Interior]] granted a “categorical exclusion” from a detailed environmental impact statement required under [[law]]<ref>[http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/nepa/nepaeqia.htm The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.]</ref> to BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling operation, according to the ''[[Washington Post]].''<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html U.S. exempted BP's Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study,] Juliet Eilperin, ''Washington Post,'' 5 May 2010.</ref> BP's exploration plan received in the Administration's MMS field office on 23 March 2009 states "no mitigation measures other than those required by regulation and BP policy will be employed to avoid, diminish or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources." It declared any spill would have only "sub-lethal" effects on fish and marine [[mammal]]s but it was "unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities."<ref>http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/initial_exploration_plan050410.pdf</ref>

As Senator, and while running for president, [[Barack Obama]] received a total of $77,051 from BP<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/BP?view=detail&siteid=nwhwk</ref> and has taken more money from BP's [[Political Action Committee]] and individuals connected with BP over the past 20 years than any other candidate, according to [[FEC]] disclosure records.<ref>[http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0505/obama-biggest-recipient-bp-political-action-money-20-years Obama is biggest recipient of BP’s political action cash in the last 20 years,] John Byrne, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from rawstory.com 9 May 2010.</ref> Likewise, the independent watchdog Center for Responsive Politics noted, "the “top recipient of BP-related donations during the 2008 cycle was President Barack Obama himself.”<ref>Jake Tapper, Political Punch, [[ABC News]], 5 May 2010. [http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/white-house-idea-that-bp-given-special-exemption-because-of-campaign-cash-to-obama-silly-and-ridiculous.html?cid=6a00d8341c4df253ef0134807669a3970c]</ref><ref>http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/04/on-thursday-oil-giant-bp.html</ref>
[[File:Bp-obama-logo.jpg|right|225px|thumb|Obama approved drilling permits for BP without the statutory requirement to file an environmental impact assessment,<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?partner=rss&emc=rss U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits,] Ian Urbina, ''New York Times'', 13 May 2010.</ref> the handling of spills in a worst-case scenario,<ref>[http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2010/bp-exempted-05-05-2010.html Interior Department Exempted BP Drilling From Environmental Review]: In Rush to Expand Offshore Oil Drilling, Interior Secretary Salazar Abandoned Pledge to Reform
Industry-dominated Mineral Management Service. Press Release, Center for Biological Diversity, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from www.biologicaldiversity.org, 30 May 2010.</ref> and fostered a cozy relationship between government and the oil industry.<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=10745153 Govt Regulators Hired by Companies, Influence Game: Drilling regulators move from government to industry through revolving door,] Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010. Retrieved from abcnews.go.com 30 May 2010.</ref> No other candidate took more money from BP in the past two decades than Obama received in only six years.<ref>[http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html Obama biggest recipient of BP cash,] Erika Lovley, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from Politico.com 30 May 2010.</ref>]]
Talk show personality Ed Schultz of [[MSNBC]] reiterated a call for campaign finance reform as a result of Barack Obama's ties to BP and the government's response.<ref>[http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100602102656.aspx MSNBC's Schultz Draws Bizarre Connection Between Oil Spill and Campaign Finance Reform.] Alex Fitzsimmons, Media Research Center, 2 June 2010.</ref>

Transocean, owner of the Deepwater Horizons drilling rig leased to BP, was the recipient of the Obama [[Mineral Management Service]]'s, ''Safety Award for Excellence''.<ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=66303 Democratic Leader Hoyer Doesn’t Know Whether Obama Administration was Prepared for Oil Spill,] Matt Cover, CNSNews.com, May 20, 2010.</ref><ref>MMS Thought Deepwater Horizon was Award-Winningly SAFE, The Project on Government Oversight, Exposing Government Corruption, 29 April 2010.</ref> On 30 April 2010 Transocean's stock fell after [[President Obama]]’s chief strategist, [[David Axelrod]], made comments nine days into the disaster and the [[government]] raised estimates to more than fives times of what had previously been reported about how much oil was leaking into the [[Gulf of Mexico]].<ref>[http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-30/transocean-drops-after-axelrod-comments-on-drilling-update2-.html Transocean Drops After Axelrod Comments on Drilling,] Edward Klump, ''Bloomberg Business Week'', 30 April 2010. Retrieved 2 June 2010.</ref>

It has been reported in the [[finance|financial]] press that among owners of BP<ref>[http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-aims-at-bp-hits-state-pensions-2010-06-09 President Obama's ramped up rhetoric over the BP oil spill is beginning to have an effect,] ''MarketWatch, 9 June 2010.</ref> are
*New Jersey Division of Investment (51 million shares)
*California Public Employees Retirement System (36 million shares)
*Pennsylvania Public School Employees Retirement System (7.1 million shares)
*Teachers Retirement System of Alabama (4.5 million shares)
*Employees Retirement System of Texas (4.1 million shares)
*Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (1.1 million shares)
*Illinois State Board of Investment (1.1 million shares)<ref>In 1990 Barack Obama took a job with the Law Firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland ([http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/06/nation/na-obamalegal6 Obama's lawyer days: brief and not all civil rights,] Dan Morain, ''Los Angeles Times'' 2008-04-06). Allison S. Davis, a senior partner in the firm, went into business with [[Chicago]] slumlord [[Tony Rezko]]. Davis was appointed to the Illinois State Board of Investment by Governor [[Rod Blagojevich]] at Rezko's request in 2003. ([http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/644511 How reform-minded City Hall critic became a cozy insider,] Tim Novak, ''Chicago Sun-Times'', 2007-11-11).</ref>
*Indiana Public Employees' Retirement Fund (0.7 million shares)
*Washington State Investment Board (1.2 million shares)
*United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund (21.9 million shares).

BP was found [[Negligence|wilfully negligent]] during the [[Bush administration]] in a [[Texas]] refinery explosion incident, and was assessed $108 million in fines - the highest workplace safety fines in U.S. history.<ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/16/60minutes/main6490197_page5.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody Blowout: The Deepwater Horizon Disaster,] ''[[60 Minutes]]'', 16 May 2010. Retrieved from cbsnews.com, 2 June 2010.</ref>

=== Nalco and Corexit ===
[[File:Dermatitis4.jpg|right|375px|thumb|Dermatitis is one immediate health concern<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/28/bp-gulf-oil-spill-pollution Gulf oil spill is public health risk, environmental scientists warn,] Suzanne Goldenberg, ''[[Guardian (uk)]]'', 28 May 2010.</ref> of the [[Obama administration]]'s decision to use [[toxic]] substances to disperse the visibility of the spill.
[http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CB4QFjAD&url=http://www.chemie.uni-regensburg.de/Physikalische_Chemie/Kunz/student/Uebung_Formulierung/Clark_presentation.pdf&rct=j&q=photo+dermatitis+corexit&ei=qn0ITPGEM-qXlAfeo8TSAQ&usg=AFQjCNHp_FTjbxFEzZI4o9iMcapG_kFO3Q&sig2=zxmIoVnIi2vekrq3WB6ztA]Residents, cleanup workers, and tourists alike may be affected. [http://chealth.canoe.ca/channel_health_news_details.asp?news_id=31005&news_channel_id=145&channel_id=145] ]]
Nalco of Naperville, Illinois formed a joint venture with Exxon Chemical in 1994 and the company's current leadership includes several executives from BP. Nalco reported it sold in excess of $40 million to BP of its dispersant, Corexit, shortly after the [[Gulf of Mexico]] oil spill disaster.

Of 18 dispersants approved by the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA), 12 were found to be more effective on southern [[Louisiana]] crude than Corexit, EPA data show.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/business/energy-environment/13greenwire-less-toxic-dispersants-lose-out-in-bp-oil-spil-81183.html Less Toxic Dispersants Lose Out in BP Oil Spill Cleanup,]
Paul Quinlan, ''Greenwire'', May 13, 2010. Retrieved from nytimes.com 25 May 2010.</ref> Two of the 12 were found to be 100 percent effective on [[Gulf of Mexico]] crude, whereas two Corexit products rated only 56 percent and 63 percent effective.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The [[toxic]]ity of the other 12 was shown to be in some cases 10 or 20 times less than Corexit, according to the EPA.<ref>Ibid.</ref> "It's a chemical that the oil industry makes to sell to itself, basically," said Richard Charter, a senior policy adviser for Defenders of Wildlife.<ref>Ibid.</ref>

Corexit was found to be one of the most toxic dispersal agents ever developed.<ref>''Acute Aquatic Toxicity of Three Corexit Products: An Overview'', Anita George-Ares and James R. Clark. Report prepared for Exxon Biomedical Sciences.</ref> With seasonal warming of water temperature the toxicity grows. Corexit is banned in the [[United Kingdom]] due to [[environment]]al concerns.<ref>[http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/05/epa-bp-dispersants Why Is the EPA Letting BP Use Dirty Dispersants?], Kate Sheppard, ''Mother Jones'', 19 May 19 2010.</ref> The Obama EPA gave BP the green light to apply Corexit to the spill.<ref>Ibid.</ref> At the Congressional hearing investigating the Gulf oil spill disaster, [[Democratic]] Representative Jerrold Nadler of [[New York]] raised the prospect of "thousands and thousands of people getting sick or dying" as a result of the administration's sanctioned use of the dispersant.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/science/earth/28workers.html Worry About Dispersant Rises as Men in Work Crew Complain of Health Problems,] Leslie Kaufman and Elizabeth Rosenthal, ''New York Times'', 27 May 2010.</ref> Critics allege use of dispersants like Corexit are largely for cosmetic purposes. Nalco has been a frequent contributor to the campaign of Sen. [[Mary Landrieu]]<ref>http://saveourwetlands.org/index-landrieu.html/</ref> of Louisiana.<ref>http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/fec/?id=273&cycle=2007-2008</ref>

== Deepwater Horizon ==
[[File:Deepwater Horizon Fire.jpg|right|250px|thumb|Fire boat response crews battle the blazing remnants of the off shore oil rig Deepwater Horizon, April 21, 2010 (U.S. Coast Guard)]]
On [[Earth Day]] 2010, a BP-leased oil drilling rig sank to the bottom of the [[Gulf of Mexico]] two days after it exploded, creating what has been described as the "worst environmental disaster in [[American History Lectures|US history]]."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/x-33986-Political-Spin-Examiner~y2010m4d29-Worst-environmental-disaster-in-US-history-Oil-slick-in-Gulf-of-Mexico-is-set-on-fire Worst environmental disaster in US history,] Maryann Tobin, ''Examiner'', April 29, 2010.</ref> [[Secretary of the Interior]] [[Ken Salazar]] told [[CNN]] "It potentially is catastrophic," and "I think we have to prepare for the worst."<ref>[http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/gulf-oil-spill:-impossible-to-measure-impact-of-%22unprecedented-environmental-disaster%22-477603.html?tickers=BP,HAL,CAM,RIG,XLE,OIL,USO Gulf Oil Spill: Impossible to Measure Impact of "Unprecedented Environmental Disaster",] Aaron Task, May 03, 2010. Retrieved from Yahoo Finance 12 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/02/salazar-oil-spill-massive-and-a-potential-catastrophe/ Salazar: Oil spill 'massive' and a potential catastrophe,] [[CNN]], 3 May 2010.</ref>

Congressional investigators think they have identified the rigs blowout preventer as the cause of the explosion. <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703339304575240323493707434.html Congress Homes In on Rig's Blowout Preventer,] Ben Casselman and Jennifer Levitz, ''Wall Street Journal Online,'' 13 May 2010.</ref> The blowout preventer was leaking hydraulic fluid, had a dead battery,<ref>Ibid.</ref> and was inspected by the Obama [[Minerals Management Service]] (MMS) only two weeks before to the explosion<ref>White House Press Office, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/press-briefing-bp-oil-spill-gulf-coast Press Briefing on the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf Coast,] 29 April 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 12 May 2010.</ref> which killed 11 people. [[Amy Goodman]], a [[leftist]] radio talk show host, has suggested those responsible should be [[prosecute]]d for [[manslaughter]].<ref>[http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/law_order_corporate_crime_unit_20100518/ Law & Order,] Amy Goodman, 18 May 2010. Retrieved from truthdigg.com 30 May 2010.</ref>

Blowout preventers are meant to shut off the well, and the last line of defense is a set of shear rams which cut the pipe and seal off the well.<ref>Congress Homes In on Rig's Blowout Preventer, Ben Casselman and Jennifer Levitz, ''WSJ Online,'' 13 May 2010.</ref> The MMS, the [[Obama administration]] agency that regulates offshore drilling along with the Coast Guard, is supposed to require proof that shear rams are powerful enough to shut the well. Michael Saucier, MMS's regional supervisor testified before Congress that the MMS did not require BP to file a "scenario for potential blowout."<ref>Ibid.</ref> The MMS certified that BP "has the capacity to respond, to the maximum extent practicable, to a worst-case discharge, or a substantial threat of such a discharge."<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/29/gulf-oil-spill-exceeds-bp_n_556798.html</ref>

A May 2010 Inspector General's report revealed at least two MMS regulatory inspectors admitted to being under the influence of the [[illegal drug]] [[methamphetamine]] while on the job.<ref>[http://www.wusf.usf.edu/news/2010/05/25/drugs_free_football_tickets_and_porn_at_minerals_management_service Drugs, Free Football Tickets and Porn at Minerals Management Service,] 25 May 2010. Retrieved from wusf.usf.edu 26 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.tgdaily.com/business-and-law-features/49932-us-bureaucrats-smoked-crystal-meth-watched-porn-as-bp-oil-rig-blew US bureaucrats smoked crystal meth, watched porn as BP oil rig blew,] Starr Keshet, 25 May 2010. Retrieved from tgdaily.com 26 May 2010.</ref>

==Environmental disaster ==
[[File:Oil slick map.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Projections of the flow of the spill over the summer of 2010. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37497578/ns/local_news-new_york_ny/] ]]
On 29 April 2010 oil began washing ashore in Plaquemines Parish, [[Louisiana]]; four weeks later local leaders still were begging [[President Obama]] for federal assistance in responding to the disaster which was overtaking hundreds of miles of shoreline.<ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/26/gulf.oil.spill.plaquemines/index.html Plaquemines Parish president blasts federal response to oil spill,] CNN, 26 May 2010.</ref>

Crude oil has washed into marshes, estuaries and onto beaches in [[Mississippi]] and [[Alabama]]. Wildlife has been killed and efforts are underway to save oil-coated
birds. Without capping the well [[Florida]]'s Everglades may be turned into a "dead zone." Scientists expect currents to carry the oil slick to the eastern seaboard of the [[United States]], fouling beaches and estuaries like the [[Chesapeake Bay]] and fishing grounds of the Grand Banks off [[Newfoundland]].

=== Silverfish ===

Most scientists agree that Corexit 9500 will have a much larger biological effect when it reaches coastal areas teeming with wildlife.<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref> Many species are being threatened at a crucial time in their life cycle.<ref>[http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2818588720100428 FACTBOX-Possible environmental impact of Gulf oil spill,] ''[[Reuters]]'', 28 April 2010.</ref> In testing done by the U.S. [[Environmental Protection Agency]] the dispersant Corexit 9500 was found to be extremely lethal to silverfish, a benchmark [[organism]] in [[toxic]]ity testing.<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>

=== Gulf menhaden ===

Gulf menhaden are a [[specie]]s harvested mostly for fish meal and fish oil. Menhaden could be badly affected
by the spill.

=== Coral, oyster and shrimp ===

Corals, oyster and shrimp likewise are critically affected. Richard Charter, a foremost expert on marine biology and oil spills who is a senior policy advisor for Marine Programmes for Defenders of Wildlife and is chairman of the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council has said, “There is a [[chemical]] [[toxic]]ity to the dispersant compound that in many ways is worse than oil,” which "in so doing you may be more seriously damaging the ecosystem offshore.”<ref>Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic. Retreived from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref> Shrimp were found to be extremely vulnerable to the lethal effects of the chemical dispersant Corexit 9500 used by [[Obama administration]] disaster relief agencies and BP in testing done by the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA).<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>

=== Brown pelican ===
[[File:Dead birds and sea turtles.jpg|right|325px|thumb|Dead birds and sea turtles. ]]
The [[Louisiana]] state bird, the Brown Pelican, was removed from protection under the U.S. Endangered Species Act in 2009. The Obama administration approved BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling rig without the proper environmental impact assessment (EIA) required by law. The disaster occurred just as breeding season commenced.

=== Other bird species ===

Other species endangered by the oil spill are American oystercatcher and Wilson's plover.

=== Sea turtles ===

As several species of sea turtles move through the Gulf during their spring nesting season, they need to surface to breathe.

=== Toxic oil spill rain ===
A report prepared by the [[Russia]]n Ministry of Natural Resources warned that the leaking [[crude oil]] into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] is about to become the worst [[environment]]al catastrophe in all of human history, threatening the entire eastern half of [[North America]] with “total destruction.” Russian scientists based the assessment on the use of millions of gallons of the government approved chemical dispersant Corexit.

The Russian scientists outlined that Corexit, with its 2.61ppm [[toxic]]ity level, combined with the seasonal warming of Gulf of Mexico waters, the [[molecule]]s will be able to “phase transition” from their present [[liquid]] to a gaseous state allowing them to be absorbed into clouds and released as “toxic rain” upon all of Eastern North America.

The scientists warned should a [[Hurricane Katrina]] like storm form in the Gulf while tens of millions of gallons of Corexit are floating on or near the surface, the resulting “toxic rain” falling upon the North American continent could “theoretically” destroy all microbial life to any depth it reaches resulting in an “unimaginable environmental catastrophe” destroying all kinds of life forms.<ref>[http://www.eutimes.net/2010/05/toxic-oil-spill-rains-warned-could-destroy-north-america/ Toxic oil spill rains warned could destroy North America,'] EUTimes, 24 May 2010. Retrieved 3 June 2010.</ref>

== The response ==

Initially [[Department of Homeland Security]] and the [[U.S. Coast Guard]] reported on 23 April 2010 there was no leak from the sunken oil rig.<ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-04-23-deepwater-horizon_N.htm Coast Guard: No oil leaking from sunken rig,] Rick Jervis, ''[[USA TODAY]]'', 23 April 2010.</ref> The next day the [[Obama administration]] officially estimated a leak from the sunken well at 1000 barrels per day.<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/24/oil-rig-deepwater-horizon_0_n_550849.html Oil Rig, Deepwater Horizon, Leaking Into Gulf Of Mexico,] Cain Burdeau, 4 April 2010. Retrieved from the ''[[Huffington Post]],'' 15 May 2010.</ref> The ''[[Associated Press]]'' reported it took nine days after the explosion and loss of life before President Obama made his first comments on the disaster.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100509/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_gulf_oil_spill_obama_s_response Obama oil response: aggressive as crisis unfolded,] ,H. Josef Hebert and Erica Werner, ''Associated Press'', 9 May 2010. Retrieved from news.yahoo.com 2 June 2010.</ref> BP's stock fell<ref>[http://in.reuters.com/article/idINLDE63S0HR20100429 European shares turn negative; BP falls,] ''Reuters'' 29 April 2010.</ref> on news of the "the worsening oil spill" and administration estimates were raised to 5000 barrels per day.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/29/us/29spill.html Size of Spill in Gulf of Mexico Is Larger Than Thought,] Campbell Robertson and Leslie Kaufman, ''New York Times,'' 28 April 2010. Retrieved 15 May 2010.</ref> and appointed a national incident commander.<ref>http://wallstcheatsheet.com/breaking-news/a-timeline-of-the-bp-oil-spill-crisis-pics/?p=10743/</ref>

=== U.S. Government dumps toxic dispersants into the Gulf of Mexico ===
[[File:Dispersants spraying.jpg|left|300px|thumb|Aerial image of the [[United States]] [[government]]'s dumping [[toxic]] disperants into the [[Gulf of Mexico]]. ]]
''Wired Science'' reports the [[Obama administration]] disaster-relief agencies are using a toxic chemical to disperse oil in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster. Use of dispersants are said to be a public relations strategy.<ref>[http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/05/gulf-dispersants/ Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative,] Brandon Keim, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from ''Wired Science'' 15 May 2010.</ref> Secretary [[Janet Napolitano]] of the [[Department of Homeland Security]] acknowledged<ref>[http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/ Obama: Oil spill bill on BP, Chem spray to save nature,] Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Updates, 04th May 2010. Retrieved from oilspillupdates.com 29 May 2010.</ref> the U.S government was dumping toxic chemicals from [[C-130]] cargo aircraft onto the spill.<ref>[http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2010-05-02/news/os-oil-disaster-chemical-cleanup-20100502_1_dispersant-spill-crude Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix,] Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref> Jackie Savitz of the ocean-conservation group Oceana stated the use of dispersants is only slightly less horrendous than the Gulf oil spill itself. "You're basically pouring chemicals into the ocean, which is never a good thing."<ref>Ibid.</ref> According to a 2009 [[Environmental Protection Agency]] report dispersants have not been used in the United State prior to the Obama administration's approval at BP'S request "because of possible long-term environmental effects, difficulties with timely and effective application, disagreement among [[scientist]]s and research data about their environmental effects, effectiveness, and [[toxic]]ity concerns" and the effects "are still unknown."<ref>Ibid.</ref> Residents in areas close to the oil spill have reported odors and symptoms such as [[headache]]s, dizziness, [[nausea]], eye irritation, and respiratory problems.<ref>[http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/gsolomon/gulf_oil_spill_air_quality_upd.html Gulf Oil Spill Air Quality,] Gina Solomon, 24 May 2010. Retrieved from Natural Resources Defense Council Staff Blog, 3 June 2010.</ref>

=== Disregard for worker safety ===
[[File:Cleaup300.jpg|right|275px|thumb|Cleanup workers exposed to the Obama adminsitration's decision to use known [[toxic]] substances to disperse the spill. Critics allege dispersants are ineffective and largely for cosmetic purposes. ]]
The ''[[Guardian (uk)]]'' has reported the controversy over Corexit exposes the [[Obama administration]] to criticism that its scientific agencies have been too accommodating to BP's strategy. In addition to the use of Corexit, the Obama [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA) came under fire for withholding test results on the toxicity of the water close to shore.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/20/gulf-oil-spill-chemical-dispersant</ref>

The dispersant 2-BE is known to cause heath dangers to clean up workers<ref>http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/gsolomon/oil_spill_clean-up_workers_get.html</ref> and wildlife alike.<ref>[http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2010/chem_dispersants_work_at_cost Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic.] Retrieved from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref> 2-BE has been documented to cause the breakdown of [[red blood cell]]s, leading to blood in urine and feces, and can damage the kidneys, liver, spleen and [[bone marrow]] of humans – effects not included on the information sheet for workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The dispersant Corexit 9500 is associated with headaches, vomiting and reproductive problems as sides effects to clean-up workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref> Lawrence Duffy of the University of Alaska claims dispersants "are more a public relations measure than a preventive one. It has an effect on our psychology because we don't see the oil slick,"<ref>Ibid.</ref> though oil particles continue to do damage.<ref>Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix, Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref>

=== Government mismanagement of relief efforts ===

Three weeks into the disaster [[National Public Radio]] reported the [[Obama administration]]'s official figures were still grossly underestimated<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126809525 Gulf Spill May Far Exceed Official Estimates,] Richard Harris, ''National Public Radio,'' 14 May 2010.</ref> and after the first month it was finally admitted the spill was nearly three times larger than earlier thought.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/us/28flow.html Estimates Suggest Spill Is Biggest in U.S. History,] Tom Zeller, Jr., ''New York Times'', 27 May 2010.</ref>

Federal officials did not begin burning the leaking oil off the surface of the water until one full week after the rig collapsed.<ref>[http://blog.al.com/live/2010/04/burning_should_have_started_a.html Burning should have started a week ago, former NOAA official says,] Ben Raines, ''Mobile Press-Register'', 29 April 2010.</ref> Louisiana Governor [[Bobby Jindal]] criticized [[President Obama]] for his slow response.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzEntQPr9OA</ref> ''The New York Times'' castigated the [[White House]] for delays and not moving quick enough, calling the evidence "damning" and declaring the Gulf oil spill a "huge disaster whose consequences might have been minimized with swifter action" from the [[Obama administration]].<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/01/opinion/01sat1.html Unanswered Questions on the Spill,] ''New York Times'' Editorial, 30 April 2010.</ref> One month into the spill, [[Democrat]]ic stalwarts [[James Carville]],<ref>[http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2521614/posts Is James Carville racist?], 26 May 2010. Retrieved from freerepublic.com 30 May 2010.</ref> [[Chris Matthews]],<ref>http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37632.html#ixzz0om46RhGH</ref> and Donna Brazile<ref>http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/99375-donna-brazile-calls-obamas-oil-spill-response-not-tough-enough</ref> criticized the inept and bungled response to the spreading catastrophe.
[[File:Finalisttransoce.jpeg|left|250px|thumb|Chris Oynes (left) of the Mineral Management Service presents Keelan Adamson (right) of Transocean the MMS's, ''Safety Award for Excellence'' (SAFE),<ref>http://www.mms.gov/awards/SAFEcriteria.htm</ref> at the MMS National Award luncheon, 7 May 2009.<ref>http://www.beaconmag.com/gomrigteamswinmm.html</ref> ''Source: Beacon magazine'']]
The [[White House]] lacked any type of plan to combat the disaster. [[U.S. House of Representatives|House]] Democratic Majority Leader [[Steny Hoyer]] publicly admitted that the [[Obama Administration]] was ill-prepared to deal with the situation. <ref>[http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2010/04/mms-thought-deepwater-horizon-was-awardwinningly-safe.html MMS Thought Deepwater Horizon was Award-Winningly SAFE,] The Project on Government Oversight, Exposing Government Corruption, 29 April 2010.</ref> While the disaster steadily grew, Obama did not discuss the crisis at length until he appeared at a photo op at Venice, Louisiana on 3 May 2010.<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126467960 Obama Says Oil Spill Damage Could Be Unprecedented,] Scott Horsley, [[NPR]], 3 May 2010.</ref> He would order a moratorium on all future deep sea oil platforms until they determine the problems associated with the current situation. As to be expected, Obama tries to remove himself from blame saying "the system failed", this despite the fact the he heads the system. Then he pointed fingers of blame at oil companies while taking an indirect jab at the Bush administration. <ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20005039-503544.html Angry Obama Seeks to Deflect Blame for Gulf Oil Spill Crisis, CBS, May 14, 2010]</ref>
{{cquote|For too long, for a decade or more, there has been a cozy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agency that permits them to drill. It seems as if permits were too often issued based on little more than assurances of safety from the oil companies. That cannot and will not happen anymore.}}
White House spokesman [[Robert Gibbs]] did his best to put a good spin on the disaster claiming the response was "comprehensive and fast." Meanwhile, the [[Democrat]]-led Congress ordered public hearings from oil executives. President Obama blamed others saying the answers from oil executives were a "ridiculous spectacle," "You had executives of BP and Transocean and Halliburton falling over each other to point the finger of blame at somebody else." <ref>[http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/burning_rig_of_fire_VkeuMCffwTUd9IBS7gUV7K?CMP=OTC-rss&FEEDNAME=#ixzz0oWm4u9zQ New look at Gulf oil spill as cleanup continues, NYPost, May 15, 2010]</ref> As the disaster progressed and questions arose over the government's misreporting and withholding<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/bp-feds-withheld-videos-showing-massive-scope-oil/story?id=10819367 BP and Feds Withheld Videos Showing Massive Scope of Oil Spill:] Coast Guard Told Public Not to 'Fixate' On Rate of Spill While Sitting On Video, Brian Ross, Matthew York, and Avni Patel, ABC News, 3 June 2010.</ref> of information from the [[public]] about the true dimensions of the calamity, the ''[[Associated Press]]'' noted,
{{cquote|First [Obama] was going to make BP pay for the Gulf oil mess. Then he declared himself in charge. Now he's trying to find out 'whose ass to kick' and making clear he'd fire BP's chief if only he could.<ref>http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100608/D9G7C5U00.html</ref>}}
[[File:Energy Tax bill.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Estimated impact of Obama Energy Tax in job losses. Total job loss: 2.2 million. ''Source: National Black Chamber of Commerce'' [http://www.nationalbcc.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=750:nbcc-study-generates-concerns-about-waxmanmarkey-climate-change-bill-costs-are-high-but-benefits-are-uncertain&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=7] ]]
=== Revitalizing cap and trade energy tax ===
:''Main article:'' '''[[Cap and trade]]'''
[[President Obama]] has been roundly criticized by [[Democrat]]s and [[Republican]]s alike for attempting to use the [[nation]]al tragedy to revitalized his failed Cap and Trade energy proposals. The Obama proposal, widely perceived as a job-killer tax increase, has stalled in the [[U.S. Senate]]. [[California]] Senator [[Dianne Feinstein]] has stated the climate bill "isn't going to stop the oil leak."<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/15/obamas-pitch-energy-speech-gulf-crisis-infuriates-republicans/ Obama Draws Bipartisan Criticism for Using Oil Spill to Push Energy Policy,] [[FOXNews]].com, 16 June 2010.</ref>

[[Environmentalist]]s want the President to push the program. Fred Krupp of the Environmental Defense Fund calls the opportunity "a political moment" to pass a carbon tax estimated to cost the average U.S. household $4300 per year.<ref>[http://blog.heritage.org/2009/05/15/the-4300-energy-tax/ The $4300 Energy Tax,] Nicolas Loris, 15 May 2009. Retrieved from Heritage.org, 19 June 2010.</ref>

Joel Benenson, who conducted polling for Obama’s presidential campaign, thinks the tax increase could pass, but wary Senate Democrats say otherwise. “There’s not a great call for it" said [[West Virginia]] Democratic Senator [[Jay Rockefeller]]. “It’s unrelated” to the immediate crisis in the Gulf noted Senator [[Ben Nelson]], Democrat from [[Nebraska]].<ref>[http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-16/democrats-say-climate-bill-lacks-momentum-after-spill-update3-.html Democrats Say Climate Bill Lacks Momentum After Spill,] Lisa Lerer and Simon Lomax, ''Bloomberg'', 16 June 2010. </ref>

=== Assistance of foreign governments ===
Nearly two-months after the disaster took place, the Obama administration decides to utilize the assistance offered by 17 countries, the U.N and the European Union. <ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/13/AR2010061304232.html After delays, [[U.S.]] begins to tap foreign aid for gulf oil spill, WaPo, June 14, 2010]</ref> International aid offers already accepted include two skimmers and 2.6 miles (4.2 kilometers) of boom from [[Mexico]], three sets of sweeping arm systems from the Netherlands and 1.86 miles (3.0 kilometers) of boom from Canada, the State Department said. The State Department noted that it has assisted BP in directly sourcing equipment and technical experts from around the world, including from Algeria, Australia, Bahrain, [[Brazil]], [[Canada]], China, Denmark, Latvia, Norway, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, and the [[United Kingdom]]. <ref>[http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/breakingnews/view/20100615-275709/US-taps-into-foreign-assistance-for-Gulf-oil-spill US taps into foreign assistance for Gulf oil spill, Agence France-Presse, June 15, 2010]</ref>

===Public relations offensive===
Faced with declining poll numbers and a public relations calamity, [[President Obama]] took to the airwaves nearly 60 days into the spill. A ''New York Times'' Op-ed commented,
{{cquote|All we got from President Obama was a vague call for some sort of new energy policy. Plus a Gulf Coast Restoration Plan, an oil spill study commission, a reminder that the secretary of energy won a Nobel Prize in physics and 17 references to God, prayer, blessings or faith.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/opinion/17collins.html The Boring Speech Policy,] Gail Collins, ''New York Times'' Op-ed, 16 June 2010.</ref><ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2010/06/17/behar-laments-shocking-bush-obama-garofalo-slams-anti-intellectual-pr Behar Panel Sees '[[Bush]]-Like' and '[[Corporatist]]' [[Obama]], [[Janeane Garofalo|Garofalo]] Slams 'Anti-Intellectual' [[Prayer]],] Joy Behar Show, [[CNN]]. Retrieved from newsbusters.org, 20 June 2010.</ref>}}
Former speechwriter for President [[Jimmy Carter]], [[Chris Matthews]], chided the President after his address to the nation,
{{cquote|Ludicrous that he keeps saying [Secretary of Energy] [[Steven Chu|Chu]] has a [[Nobel prize]]. I'll barf if he does it one more time.<ref>[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/06/15/msnbc_trashes_obamas_address_compared_to_carter_i_dont_sense_executive_command.html MSNBC Trashes Obama's Address: Compared To Carter, "I Don't Sense Executive Command,"]. Retrieved from RealClearPolitics.com, 20 June 2010.</ref>}}

==Economic impacts==
[[File:Oilslick.png|right|275px|thumb| Oil slick map as of May 30, 2010.]]
The economic impact of the [[Gulf of Mexico]] oil drilling disaster will be large and devastating to several key industries, including fishing, tourism, and transportation.<ref>[http://www.ihsglobalinsight.com/Perspective/PerspectiveDetail18638.htm Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Gulf Coast Oil Spill,] Nariman Behravesh, 4 May 2010. Retrieved from ihsglobalinsights.com 8 May 2020.</ref>

The top commercial species in terms of value are shrimp ($367 million), menhaden ($64 million), oysters ($59 million), and blue crab ($38 million).<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Fisheries Economics of the United States, Silver Spring, MD, 2008.</ref> As of 25 May 2010, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) closed 54,096 square miles to commercial and recreational fishing.<ref>http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/deepwater_horizon_oil_spill.htm</ref> These areas are some of the richest fishing grounds in the Gulf of Mexico for major commercial species such as white shrimp, blue crab, and oysters.

===Employment in fishing===
The most immediate economic impact of the oil spill has been on the Gulf fishing<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/video/asset/fishing-industry-hammered-by-gulf-oil-spill/41612D0E-B338-464D-A15E-5885B1D227D6</ref> industry. The number of [[job]]s at stake, which includes seafood processing and related wholesale and retail, is over 200,000 with related [[economic]] activity of $5.5 billion.<ref>[http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41262.pdf Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Selected Issues for Congress,] Curry L. Hagerty and Jonathan L. Ramseur, Congressional Research Service, 27 May 2010. (pdf p. 2.).</ref>

Dockside sales in [[Louisiana]] are approximately $660 million.<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Departtment of Commerce, [http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st5/publication/econ/2008/FEUS%202008%20ALL.pdf Fisheries Economics of the United States,] Silver Spring, MD, 2008. (pdf).</ref> Loses to the Louisiana fishing could be as high as $2.5 billion.<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/story/insurers-brace-for-liability-hit-from-oil-spill-2010-05-05</ref>

===Employment in tourism===

The tourist industry employs 620,000 people who earn over $9 billion in wages in the Gulf of Mexico region. Analysts say [[Florida]] alone could lose $3 billion in tourism.<ref>[http://www.royalgazette.com/rg/Article/article.jsp?articleId=7da532730030019&sectionId=65 Insurance industry concern grows over oil spill liability,] Alistair Barr, ''Royal Press Gazette'', 6 May 2010.</ref>

In 2008, recreational anglers took 25.4 million fishing trips and spent over $12 billion on equipment and trips in the Gulf region.<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Fisheries Economics of the United States, Silver Spring, MD, 2008.</ref> Some of the most popular recreational species include snappers, several types of drum, sheepshead, and Spanish mackerel. Recreational fisheries support businesses such as charters, bait and tackle, and services such as restaurants and hotels.

In 2000, 21.9 million people visited Gulf beaches and accounted for 177.2 million beach days.<ref>Brent Ache, David Bylsma, and Kristen Crossett, et al., The Gulf of Mexico at a Glance, National Ocean Service, NOAA, A Tool for the Gulf of Mexico Alliance and the American Public, Washington, DC, 2008. [http://gulfofmexicoalliance.org/pdfs/gulf_glance_1008.pdf pdf].</ref>

===Transportation===
The Offshore Marine Service Association (OMSA),<ref>[http://www.marinelog.com/DOCS/NEWSMMIX/2010jun00034.html OMSA slams offshore drilling moratorium,] 3 June 2010. Retrieved from Marinelog.com, 19 June 2010.</ref> the national trade association for U.S. flag vessels in the energy sector, criticized the [[Obama administration]]'s moratorium on offshore drilling projects. 100,000 jobs were immediately affected by the president's decision as companies began cancelling contracts to carry supplies, forcing layoffs. "The industry has struggled to climb out of a severe economic downturn. The moratorium threatens any hope of recovery and creates the potential for economic hardship that could last a decade or longer," remarked OMSA President Ken Wells.

OMSA estimates that for every mariner who works on-board a vessel, there are nine other Americans working in shore-side jobs that support vessel operations. Beyond the vessel crew, the negative consequences of the moratorium could impact everyone from service technicians supporting everything from diesel engines to the air condition systems to the local grocer who supplies food for the boat's galley.

Offshore vessels are a major part of the tax base in many coastal communities. Gulf Coast state and local government revenues will also decrease due to lower [[income tax]] and [[sales tax]] collections.

Disruption of shipping traffic in and out of the Port of [[New Orleans]] will impact barge, container, and tanker traffic in the Mississippi Delta and along the [[Mississippi River]]. Prices of all types of commodities would affected.

=== Insurance industry ===

BP, the operator on the oil drilling lease with a 65% stake, insured itself, rather than buying coverage from insurance companies. Industry analysts estimate total costs related to the oil spill cleanup and damages could exceed $14 billion. <ref>[http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKLDE6410IJ20100502 U.S. oil spill could bill could exceed $14 billion,] Tom Bergin, ''Reuters,'' 2 May 2010.</ref>

=== Lost revenue to state and local governments ===
:'''Louisiana'''
A Greater New Orleans study indicates the [[Obama administration]]'s moratorium could cost [[Louisiana]] as many as 22,000 jobs and more than $782 million in revenues.

With the average deepwater rig employing 230 workers with an average salary of $98,000, the study puts the tax revenue impact at $151 million if drilling were to resume within 18 months. Greater New Orleans President and CEO Michael Hecht says it’s difficult to be optimistic based on President Obama’s [[Oval Office]] address on 15 June 2010. President Obama's action “has the potential to turn an ecological tragedy into an economic calamity,” Hecht said.<ref>[http://neworleanscitybusiness.com/blog/2010/06/16/study-moratorium-could-cost-up-to-22000-jobs-782m-in-lost-revenue/ Study: Moratorium could cost up to 22,000 jobs, $782M in lost revenue,] Greg LaRose, ''New Orleans City Business'', 16 June 2010.</ref> The study foresees in a worse case scenario the loss of more than 22,000 jobs, 3,450 of them directly tied to the operating rigs and 18,945 with indirect ties such as catering firms and other companies that serve U.S energy producers.

Fearing that the drilling moratorium "could exacerbate, rather than alleviate, the impacts of this spill upon both our [[economy]] and our [[environment]]," U.S. Senator [[Mary Landrieu]] wrote to President Obama on 11 June 2010.<ref>http://landrieu.senate.gov/mediacenter/pressreleases/06-11-2010-1.cfm</ref> Landrieu stated,
{{Cquote|more than 300,000 Louisianians are employed either directly or indirectly by the oil and gas industry. ..The immediate impacts to the economy are devastating enough: idling the 33 rigs currently permitted to drill in the deepwater Gulf would immediately impact [[employment]] for roughly 38,000 crewmen, deck hands, engineers, welders, ROV operators, caterers, helicopter pilots, and others who operate and service these vessels. That's like closing 12 large motor vehicle assembly plants in one state, all at once.}}

Lost state and local tax revenues will accrue at a rate between $8 million and $15 million a month. Federal royalty losses will be substantial and a significant drop in tolls collected for the Louisiana Highway 1 bridge at Leeville, the main artery to the Port Fourchon energy port is projected as well.
:'''Texas'''
The [[Texas]] state comptroller’s office reported collection of $2.3 billion in oil and natural gas production taxes in fiscal year 2009 and $4.1 billion in 2008. The tax revenue is used to repair roads and fund schools, among other state services. Although no official analysis of President Obama's decision to place a moratorium on offshore production has been compiled yet, the Texas comptroller’s office said it’s unclear how much of an impact the president's decision will have on state services. Experts warn the president's decision could threaten tens of thousands of jobs in the [[Houston]] area.<ref>[http://www.kvue.com/news/state/Deepwater-drilling-moratorium-threatens-Texas-tax-revenue-95848579.html Deepwater drilling moratorium threatens Texas' tax revenue,] Gabe Gutierrez, 8 June 2010. Retrieved from kvue.com, 20 June 2010.</ref>
:'''Alabama'''
Manufacturing jobs in [[Alabama]] are at risk as a result of [[President Obama]]'s actions, as no new orders for equipment are coming in.<ref>[http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=94652 NOIA Member Cos Feel Drilling Moratorium Impacts,] National Ocean Industries Association, 11 June 2010.</ref>

=== Increased dependency on foreign oil ===

[[New Jersey]] Democrat Senator [[Robert Menendez]] proposed a ban on new offshore drilling permits and submitted a bill that would retroactively raise the financial liability of BP from $75 million to $10 billion. <ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/05/senator-menendez-on-oil-spill-no-new-drilling-permits.html Senator Menendez on Oil Spill: No New Drilling Permits, ABCNews, May 12, 2010]</ref> Oklahoma [[Republican]] Senator [[James Inhofe]] successfully killed the bill saying it would reduce competition and shut down smaller independent oil companies in favor of larger companies.

=== Too big to fail ===
An oil industry trade publication<ref>[http://oilprice.com/Environment/Oil-Spills/The-Cover-up-BP-s-Crude-Politics-and-the-Looming-Environmental-Mega-Disaster.html The Cover-up: BP's Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster,] Wayne Madsen, 06 May 2010. Retrieved from oilprice.com 6 June 2010.</ref> reports [[President Obama]] and senior White House staff, as well as Interior Secretary [[Ken Salazar]], are working with BP on [[legislation]] that would raise the cap on [[liability]] for damage claims from those affected by the oil disaster from $75 million to $10 billion. However the disaster has the real potential of costing nearly $1 trillion. Critics point out that in the deal between Obama and BP, $10 billion is a drop in the bucket for a trillion dollar disaster. Talk is noted in government circles, including [[FEMA]], of the need to nationalize BP in order to compensate those who will ultimately be affected by the worst oil disaster in the history of the world, and BP would, if its assets were nationalized, be credited with almost a trillion dollars for compensation purposes.<ref>[http://www.infowars.com/the-cover-up-bps-crude-politics-and-the-looming-environmental-mega-disaster-2/ The Cover-up: BP's Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster,] Wayne Madsen, 06 May 2010. Retrieved from infowars.com 6 June 2010.</ref><ref>[http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/31/why_obama_should_put_bp_under_temporary_receiversh/ Why Obama Should Put BP Under Temporary Receivership,] [[Obama_doublespeak#Change|Robert Reich]], 31 May 2010. Retrieved from talkingpointsmemo.com, 6 June 2010.</ref>

After Obama charged [[Attorney General]] [[Eric Holder]] to investigate the disaster, BP establish a $20 billion extrajudicial fund managed by an Obama appointee.<ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37574 Obama's Latest Shakedown,] David Limbaugh, ''Human Events'', 06/20/2010.</ref> Former [[CNN]] news writer and radio talk show host Mike Malloy suggested Holder is beholden to [[corporatist]] interests.<ref>[http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100603042451.aspx The AG vs. BP: Little Skepticism on ABC and NBC, While Lefty Talker Blasts Holder as 'Corporatist' Pretender], Rich Noyes, Media Research Center, 3 June 2010.</ref>

== Criticism of the Obama administration's handling of the disaster ==
[[File:Memorial for oil workers.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Memorial service for the 11 workers killed in the explosion. ''Reuters'' [http://www.daylife.com/photo/00nya1C9URdAy?q=Mississippi] ]]
Former top adviser to President [[Bill Clinton]], [[James Carville]], turned visibly emotional in a interview with [[George Stephanopoulos]] on [[ABC]]'s ''[[Good Morning America]]'' over [[President Barack Obama]]'s "lackadaisical" response to the Gulf oil spill disaster.
{{Cquote|The political [[stupid]]ity is unbelievable. ... The President of the United States could have come down here. He could have been involved with the families of these 11 people...... He could have implemented a plan in anticipation of this... He could be commandeering tankers and making BP bring tankers in and clean this up.... He could be deploying people to the coast. He could be with the corps of engineers and the Coast Guard with these people in Plaquemines Parish, doing something about these regulations. These people are crying. They're begging for something down here. And it just looks like he's not involved in this! Man, you have got to get down here and take control of this! Put somebody in charge of this and get this thing moving! We're about to die down here!<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/bp-oil-spill-political-headache-obama-democrats-slam/story?id=10746519 'Political Stupidity': Democrat James Carville Slams Obama's Response to BP Oil Spill; Democratic Strategist Said White House Should've Acted Quickly: 'We're About to Die Down Here',] Jake Tapper and Huma Khan, ''Good Morning America,'' 26 May 2010. Retrieved from abcnews.go.com 28 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0526/unhinged-carville-obama-gulf/ Unhinged Carville goes off on Obama on oil spill, The Raw Story, May 26, 2010]</ref><ref>http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasalert/2010/20100526121155.aspx</ref>}}
Carville also said in a separate interview on [[CNN]] with [[Anderson Cooper]],
{{Cquote|They are risking everything by this ‘go along with BP’ strategy they have. They seem, like, lackadaisical on this...they seem like they’re inconvenienced by this, this is some giant thing getting in their way and somehow or another, if you let BP handle it, it’ll all go away. It’s not going away. It’s growing out there. It is a disaster of the first magnitude...the government thinks that they are partnering with BP. I think they actually believe that BP has some kind of a good motivation here. That’s one of the, sort of, whole flaws is they're naïve.<ref>[http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1005/23/sotu.01.html State of the Union with Candy Crowley,] CNN, 23 May 2010. Retrieved 20 May 2010.</ref><ref>http://www.mediaite.com/tv/james-carville-obama-administration-seems-inconvenienced-by-bp-oil-spill/</ref>}}
Obama acknowledged the criticism days later in a televised press conference:
{{Cquote|Where I was wrong was in my belief that the oil companies had their act together when it came to worst-case scenarios.<ref>Remarks by President Obama on the Gulf Oil Spill, Office of the Press Secretary, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 29 May 2010.</ref>}}
[[File:Day12 comedyskit1.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Day 12 of the Disaster: Obama enjoys an evening of levity and banter with the Washington Press Corps at the White House Correspondent's Dinner.]]
[[MSNBC]] talk show host [[Chris Matthews]]<ref>Matthews said of Obama during the Potomac Primaries, "it's part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama's speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often." [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/13/chris-matthews-i-felt-thi_n_86449.html]</ref> said on [[Jay Leno]]'s ''Tonight Show'',
{{Cquote|The president scares me. He's been acting a little like a Vatican Observer here. When is he actually going to do something? And I worry. I know he doesn't want to take ownership of it. I know politics. He said the minute he says, 'I'm in charge,' he takes the blame.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100524/pl_ynews/ynews_pl2219 White House seeks to fend off growing chorus of critics on handling of Gulf spill,] ''Yahoo News'', 24 May 2010. Retrieved 30 May 2010.</ref>}}

[[Secretary of State]] [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]'s presidential campaign manager in 2008 questioned if [[Democratic]] primary [[voter]]s had
{{Cquote|underestimated the value of experience and crisis management as important attributes for their president.<ref>[http://topics.npr.org/article/04M3gpJa4p92Z?q=NPR Did 2008 Democratic primary voters underestimate value of experience?] Alex Pappas, ''The Daily Caller'', 06/06/10. Retrieved from npr.org, 6 June 2010.</ref>}}

Donna Brazile, who managed the presidential campaign of Democratic [[candidate]] [[Al Gore]] in 2000 said on [[ABC]]'s ''[[This Week]]'',
{{Cquote|One of the problems I have with the administration is that they're not tough enough. They are waiting for BP to say, ‘oh, we've got a new plan to stop the oil leak.’ They need to stop it, contain it, clean it up, and try to help us conserve our coastal wetlands.<ref>[http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/99375-donna-brazile-calls-obamas-oil-spill-response-not-tough-enough Donna Brazile calls Obama’s oil spill response ‘not tough enough’,] Ben Geman, ''The Hill'', 23 May 2010.</ref>}}

[[Dick Morris]], an intimate adviser to President [[Bill Clinton]] observed,
{{Cquote|these failings show that Obama is in over his head. But to the [[left]], which bleeds for each drop of water in the gulf and cries over every turtle or shrimp or sea bird, it is an unpardonable sin...Obama's incompetence and inexperience is causing [[liberal]]s to see him as arrogant, aloof, removed, conceited, suspicious of outside advice and even lazy...these character defects will haunt the president until 2012 and beyond.<ref>[http://townhall.com/columnists/DickMorrisandEileenMcGann/2010/06/19/dems_turn_on_obama?page=full&comments=true Dems Turn On Obama,] Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, 19 June 2010. Retrieved from Townhall.com 19 June 2010.</ref>}}

David Gergen worked in the [[Reagan]], [[George H.W. Bush]], and Clinton White House remarked,
{{Cquote|If our government had fought [[WWII]] like the way we’re fighting the oil spill, there’s a good chance many of us would be speaking [[German]] today.<ref>[http://www.ihatethemedia.com/david-gergen-rips-obama-oil-spill-response Another Democrat turns on Obama: David Gergen rips Obama’s oil spill response, Ihatethemedia.com, May 27, 2010]</ref>}}

[[Peggy Noonan]], a speech writer for President's Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, summed up public perceptions with,
{{Cquote|The president, in my view, continues to govern in a way that suggests he is chronically detached from the central and immediate concerns of his countrymen.... he has not, almost from the day he was inaugurated, been in sync with the [[Centrist|center]]....The American people have spent at least two years worrying that high government spending would, in the end, undo the republic. They saw the dollars gushing night and day...And now we have a videotape metaphor for all the public’s fears: the well gushing black oil into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] ...His philosophy is that it is appropriate for the federal government to occupy a more burly, significant and powerful place in America—confronting its problems of need, injustice, inequality. ... Then the oil spill came and government could not do the job, could not meet the need ...[[Hurricane Katrina|Katrina]] illustrate[d] that even though the federal government in our time has continually taken on new missions and responsibilities, the more it took on, the less it seemed capable of performing even its most essential jobs. [[Conservative]]s got this point—they know it without being told—but [[liberal]]s and [[progressive]]s did not. They thought Katrina was the result only of [[George W. Bush]]’s incompetence and conservatives’ failure to “believe in government.” But Mr. Obama was supposed to be competent....It’s not good to have a president in this position—weakened, polarizing and lacking broad public support—less than halfway through his term. That it is his fault is no comfort.<ref>[http://www.peggynoonan.com/article.php?article=524 He Was Supposed to Be Competent]: The spill is a disaster for the president and his political philosophy., Peggy Noonan, ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'', 29 May 2010.</ref>}}

''[[New York Times]]'' columnist [[Liberal_hate_speech#Against_the_disabled|Maureen Dowd]] wrote,
{{Cquote|Obama and top aides who believe in his [[divinity]] make a mistake to dismiss complaints of his aloofness as Washington white noise. He treats the press as a nuisance rather than examining his own inability to encapsulate Americans’ feelings.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/30/opinion/30dowd.html Once More, With Feeling,] Maureen Dowd, ''New York Time'' Op Ed, 29 mMay 2010.l</ref>}}

Actor Robert Redford demanded action from the [[Obama administration]]. The liberal special interest group [[Natural Resources Defense Council]] has Redford in a new ad decrying the lackluster response.<ref>[http://biggovernment.com/jmeath/2010/05/25/obamas-katrina-in-the-gulf/ Obama’s ‘Katrina’ in the Gulf, BigGovernment.com, May 25, 2010]</ref> Redford made an appearance on MSNBC and said there is no one manning this ship,
{{Cquote|In this case, we don’t need a disaster manager, we need a leader.}}

[[Hollywood values|Liberal Hollywood]] director [[James Cameron]] says;
{{cquote|Over the last few weeks I've watched, as we all have, with growing horror and heartache, watching what's happening in the Gulf and thinking those morons don't know what they're doing. <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/cameron-titanic-spill-morons/2010/06/03/id/361007 'Titanic' Director Cameron: 'Morons' Directing Spill Efforts, NewsMax, June, 2010]</ref>}}

Obnoxious Hollywood liberal [[Rosie O'Donnell]] said, "We broke the womb of freaking mother Earth." <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2010/06/08/rosie-odonnell-wants-bps-assets-seized-we-broke-freakin-womb-mother-eart Rosie O'Donnell Wants BP's Assets Seized, NewsBusters.org, June 8, 2010]</ref> In addition, O'Donnell accused BP of
{{cquote|willful homicide, willful mass murder" and demanded BP be nationalized immediately: "I say seize their assets. Right now. Seize their assets today. Take over the company.}}

===Foreign reaction===
Relations between allies the [[U.K.]] and U.S. are now at historic lows thanks to Barack Obama's mishandling of the oil spill. Britain had been repeatedly mocked by Obama prior to the spill<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/mar/06/obama-dvd-brown Obama's DVD gift to Brown - it's the thought that counts,] ''Guardian UK,'' March 6, 2009.</ref> <ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4623148/Barack-Obama-sends-bust-of-Winston-Churchill-on-its-way-back-to-Britain.html Barack Obama sends bust of Winston Churchill on its way back to Britain,] ''Telegraph UK,'' February 14, 2009.</ref> <ref>[http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/03/obama_disses_brit_pm.html Obama disses Brit PM, American Thinker,] March 5, 2009.</ref> but now find themselves subjected to endless [[propaganda]]. Prominent foreign dignitaries have expressed the public's growing frustration with the administration's posturing and hunt for scapegoats. The mayor of London, Boris Johnson, who supported Obama in 2008, decried "anti-British rhetoric, buck-passing and name-calling" while Lord Tebbit branded Mr Obama's conduct “despicable” and the president's rhetoric
{{cquote|a crude, [[bigot]]ed, [[xenophobic]] display of [[partisan]] political Presidential petulance."<ref>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1285467/BP-OIL-SPILL-Lord-Tebbit-Boris-Johnson-attack-Obamas-anti-British-rhetoric.html#ixzz0rK7zthtN</ref><ref>[http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23843524-boris-johnson-tells-barack-obama-stop-bashing-britain.do Boris Johnson tells Barack Obama: Stop bashing Britain,] London Evening Standard, June 6, 2010.</ref>}}
The atmosphere Obama created in Britain is so toxic that the British press has labelled Barack Obama the most unpopular man in England. <ref>[http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/06/17/2010-06-17_president_barack_obama_is_the_most_hated_man_in_england_says_british_reporter.html Barack Obama: the most unpopular man in Britain?,] Telegraph UK, June 17, 2010.</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|3}}

[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Disasters]]
[[Category: Environment]]

==External Links==
* [http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23oilspill Twitter Feed: #Oilspill (warning vulgar comments left)]
* [http://www.bp.com/bodycopyarticle.do?categoryId=1&contentId=7052055&nicam=USCSBaselineCrisis&nisrc=Google&nigrp=Non_Branded Official BP Global Oil Spill News Website]
* [http://dailybail.com/slideshows/bp-disaster-dying-birds/5613601 Photos of Gulf birds covered in oil]

User talk:ChrisGT90

2010-07-27T17:13:19Z

ChrisGT90: /* Edits */

User talk:ChrisGT90

2010-07-27T17:11:07Z

ChrisGT90: /* Tomorrow song */

Essay:Greatest Conservative Songs

2010-07-22T00:45:30Z

ChrisGT90: Removed "Don't Stop (Thinking About Tomorrow)," as the lyrics don't reflect values endorsed by any particular group. It's just about looking forward to what lies ahead.

Conservative songs exist, and some are immensely popular. Here is our growing list:
#"Wouldn't It Be Nice" by the Beach Boys. Pro-marriage.
#"Have You Forgotten?" by [[Darryl Worley]]. Patriotic response to [[September 11, 2001 attacks]].<ref>http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=15568</ref>
#"Still the One" by Orleans (1976), is a tribute to fidelity in relationships.
#"Sweet Home Alabama" by [[Lynyrd Skynyrd]]. A response to hippie culture. Defends Southerners from stereotyped attacks by [[liberal]] rocker Neil Young.
#Lee Greenwood's rendition of [[Battle Hymn of the Republic]]. "As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free."
#"My Love" by [[Petula Clark]]. Christian love in secular form.
#"Starting All Over Again" by [[Petula Clark]]. Keep moving onward, even in the most difficult of times.
#"Thank You My Lord" by [[Petula Clark]]. The title says it all.
#"I Fought the Law (and the Law Won)". Its title says it all. The version by [[The Clash]] has a good tempo.
#"Fast Car" by [[Tracy Chapman]]. Self-help, free market, division of labor, and a criticism of alcohol.
#"You Can't Hurry Love (You Just Have to Wait)". Abstinence for rock fans. The versions by [[The Supremes]] and [[Phil Collins]] were popular.
#"Pomp and Circumstance" ([http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOcvcBxrfN4 ''Land of Hope & Glory'']) By Freedom gain, by Truth maintain...
#[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQ0oCmDXrVk&mode=related&search= "Jerusalem"] Don't let the sword sleep in the hand.
#[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wahd2piIr4Q "Brothers In Arms"] by [[Dire Straits]]. We're fools to make war on our brothers in arms.
#"The Ascent of Stan" by [[Ben Folds]]. Tells the story of a former "textbook hippie man" who realizes that he has become everything that he was protesting against.
#"Brick" by [[Ben Folds Five]]. Shows the regret involved in abortion.
#"Alive" by [[P.O.D]].: About being thankful for the gift of life.
#"Gotta Serve Somebody" by [[Bob Dylan]]. "It may be the devil or it may be the Lord."<ref>http://www.bobdylan.com/songs/serve.html</ref>
#"Stand By Your Man," by [[Tammy Wynette]]. Don't expect [[feminists]] to like that one! Or [[Hillary Clinton]]!
#"Jesus Take The Wheel" by [[Carrie Underwood]]. A gospel-themed hit from the American Idol winner.
#"Red Barchetta" by [[Rush]]. Tells the story of a future with excessive regulation, where even driving is illegal.
#"You Light Up My Life" by [[Debbie Boone]]. One of the biggest hits ever, but [[liberals]] omit that this song is about [[Jesus]].
#"Father of Mine" by [[Everclear]]. A reminder of the importance of good parenting. Everclear singer Art Alexakis wrote much of his material from his own perspective of a troubled childhood. At the end of the song, Alexakis promises to be a better father than his own had been.
#"Happiness is a Warm Gun" by [[The Beatles]]. It sure is.
#"The Taxman" by [[The Beatles]]. George Harrison said, "Taxman was when I first realized that even though we had started earning money, we were actually giving most of it away in taxes." <ref>http://home.att.net/~chuckayoub/Taxman_Lyrics.html</ref>
#"Back in the U.S.A." by [[Chuck Berry]]. A patriotic song about missing life in the U.S.A.
#"Government Cheese" by [[The Rainmakers]]. Humorous spoof of welfare.
#"Angry Young Man" by [[Billy Joel]]. The doctrinaire leftist radical with "his fist in the air and his head in the sand" comes in for biting criticism.
#"Gimme Back My Bullets" by [[Lynyrd Skynyrd]]. The name says it all.
#"Let My People Go" by [[The Pursuit of Happiness]]. "How will you free us with your hate? How many heads will smash when you smash the state? You say march, I think I'll wait." An anti-protest song.
#"Don't Let 'Em Take Your Gun" by [[Grand Funk Railroad]]. A father gives his son some sage advice.
#"Something For Nothing" by [[Rush]]. "You can't get something for nothing, you can't have freedom for free."
#"Neighborhood Bully" by [[Bob Dylan]]. Israel's right to exist and defend itself.
#"Get It Right the First Time" by [[Louisiana's Le Roux]]. Wealthy Georgia politician is placed in high office and turns out to be a puppet with no ideas of his own. Released in 1980 when Jimmy Carter was up for re-election.
#"Only The Young" by [[Journey]]. "The shadows of a golden age, a generation waits for dawn, the brave carry on, the bold and the strong". An anthem for the Reagan Generation.
#[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2UE5g72s0o "Yours Is No Disgrace"] by [[Yes]]. Written to, and about, the troops headed for Vietnam.
#"Fair Exchange" and "Sparks of the Tempest" by [[Kansas (band)|Kansas]]. Warnings about totalitarian governments who want to take away your freedom in the name of utopia. Also much of their early 80s material, which has Christian lyrics.
#"In America" by the [[Charlie Daniels]] Band. Patriotism makes a comeback in response to the Iran hostage crisis and Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
#"Storm the Embassy" by the [[Stray Cats]]. Another conservative song about the Iran hostage crisis.
#"We Must Take America Back" by [[Steve Vaus]]. Became an underground country music hit in 1992 after RCA dropped him and took the album out of print due to the political lyrics.
#"Renegade" by [[Steppenwolf]]. John Kay's childhood escape from Communist East Germany.
#"Capitalism" by [[Oingo Boingo]]. There's nothing wrong with free enterprise.
#"Unborn Child" by [[Seals and Crofts]]. This pro-life song was a hit single in 1974, but for some reason gets left off the Seals and Crofts greatest hits albums.
#"Bad Rap (Who You Tryin' To Kid, Kid?)" by [[Steve Taylor]]. Takes aim at LA and NY hipsters, the Village Voice, abortion, and "the left-wing band with their head in the sand".
#"Last Kiss" by [[Pearl Jam]]. "Oh where oh where can my baby be; The Lord took her away from me; She's gone to heaven so I got to be good; So I can see my baby when I leave this world"<ref>http://www.songmeanings.net/lyric.php?lid=14</ref>
#"Love Me, I'm a Liberal" by [[Phil Ochs]]. Revealing Liberal hypocrisy for what it is.
#"America USA" by [http://giveagiftofsong.com/products.htm]Joey Sudyka. Not very well known, perhaps, but a good patriotic song.
#"Red White and Blue" by [[Lynyrd Skynyrd]].
#"Simple Man" by Charlie Daniels. A song about how drugs and poor politics are a result of people putting their bibles down. Also a strongly pro death penalty song.
#"That Smell" by [[Lynyrd Skynyrd]]. A very strong anti-drug use song by Americas most prestigious southern rock band.
#Virtually anything by [[Toby Keith]], but especially "Courtesy of the Red, White & Blue (The Angry American)".
#"Under God" by [[Pat Boone]].
#"Christmas Shoes" by NewSong - a Christmas song by a Christian band.
#"God Bless the USA" by Lee Greenwood.<ref>http://www.scoutsongs.com/lyrics/proudtobeamerican.html</ref>
#"God Bless America" Words and music by Irving Berlin.
#[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kZ0pA9REyU "No Opportunity Necessary, No Experience Needed"] [[Yes]] ''...I know your cross is heavier With every step Every step But I know a man who'd walk miles for you...''
#[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCXiuqJ1E6g Supper'sReady] [[Genesis (band)|Genesis]] ''There's an angel standing in the sun, and he's crying with a loud voice, "This is the supper of the mighty one", Lord of Lords, King of Kings, Has returned to lead his children home, To take them to the new Jerusalem.''
#[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoaH0I9UwLI "Your Love Is Extravagant"] Casting Crowns
#[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnnhYE1DhC4 "What If His People Prayed"] Casting Crowns
#[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EBiei21-C8 "King Without a Crown"] by Matisyahu - A Hasidic Jew raps about God as the source of happiness and salvation from the things of this world: "If you're drowning in the waters and you can't stay afloat ask Hashem for mercy and He'll throw you a rope."
#"Take Me Home, Country Roads" by John Denver (and others). Celebrates Southern country landscape and traditions.
#"Sin City" by the Flying Burrito Brothers. Attacks modern decadence and predicts divine punishment for sin.
#"I Saw the Light" by Hank Williams (and numerous cover versions). Redemption from sin through faith.
#"No Son of Mine" by Genesis.
#"Lightning Crashes" by Live. The joy and significance of childbirth.
#"Takin' Care of Business" by Bachman-Turner Overdrive. The work ethic and promoting self-employment.
#"Cat's In The Cradle" by Harry Chapin. The importance of traditional families and responsible fatherhood.
#[http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=6547 "The Devil Went Down To Georgia"] by Charlie Daniels. A deeper message here, as Daniels explains.
== References ==
<references/>

Please add your best conservative picks.

[[Category:Essays about Conservatism]]

Gulf of Mexico oil spill

2010-07-20T04:22:22Z

ChrisGT90: The source didn't say that the Obama administration approved Deepwater Horizon. The rig started construction in 1998, so it seems unlikely Obama had any influence in its approval.

[[File:Dispersants spraying.jpg|right|300px|thumb|President Obama directed the [[United States Coast Guard]] to dump [[toxic]] disperants into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] despite known health hazards to humans and wildlife. [http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/] ]]The '''Gulf of Mexico oil spill''' began on 20 April 2010 when the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil drilling rig operated by [[BP]] (known as British Petroleum until 2000) exploded and sank.<ref>[http://www.businessinsider.com/gulf-of-mexico-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-2010-4 Here's The Questions You Should Be Asking About The Gulf Of Mexico Oil Spill]</ref> Oil began leaking at a rate later estimated at 2.5 million gallons per day, resulting in massive environmental degradation.<ref>[http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hSaoIddZwUtk-BTcIDuy6AjaHwSgD9GBV0GO0 Scientists: Oil leaking up to 2.52M gallons daily]</ref> The blowout also killed eleven workers. Despite the known [[toxic]]ity of the dispersant Corexit, the [[Obama administration]] dumped millions of gallons of the hazardous chemical into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] with C-130 aircraft provided by the [[U.S. Coast Guard]]<ref>http://vodpod.com/watch/3962219-confirmed-corexit-being-sprayed-from-coast-guard-planes</ref>and the [[Air Force]].<ref>http://bpoilslick.blogspot.com/2010/07/us-air-force-sprays-corexit-from-plane.html</ref>

On 31 March 2010 [[President Obama]] announced a plan for exploitation of offshore oil reserves during a speech at Andrews Air Force Base outside [[Washington, D.C.]]<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/user/AssociatedPress#p/u/6/mA7RAfHN-wo Obama Lifts Ban on Offshore Drilling,] ''[[Associated Press]],'' 31 March 2010. Retrieved from [[Youtube]] 9 May 2010.</ref> The President's actions have been labeled, "a decision to endanger our coastal [[ecosystem]]s with the risk of catastrophic oil spills."<ref>[http://members.greenpeace.org/blog/greenpeaceusa_blog/2010/04/30/president_obama_committed_to_endangering President Obama must reinstate moratorium on offshore drilling,] [[Greenpeace]] USA blogs, 30 Apr 2010.</ref> Defending the decision, the President remarked "oil rigs today generally don’t cause spills. They are technologically very advanced."<ref>White House Press Release, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-a-discussion-jobs-and-economy-charlotte-north-carolina Remarks by the President in a Discussion on Jobs and the Economy in Charlotte, North Carolina,] Office of the Press Secretary, April 02, 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 3 May 2010.</ref><ref>Video: [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/04/29/flashback_obama_says_oil_rigs_today_dont_generally_cause_spills.html Obama Says "Oil Rigs Today Don't Generally Cause Spills"], 2 April 2010. Retrieved from RealClearPolitics.com 12 May 2010.</ref>

Since January 2009 the [[Obama administration]] approved 346 oil drilling plans without securing permits required by law from the [[federal]] agency that assesses environmental impacts.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?partner=rss&emc=rss U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits,] Ian Urbina, ''New York Times'', 13 May 2010. Retrieved 28 May 2010.</ref> [[President Barack Obama]] has been widely criticized for an unprepared and bungled response, most notably from former supporters.
 
{{cquote|'''''<big>We're in charge, but BP is responsible.</big>''''' -- '''Barack Obama, news conference of 5/27/2010'''<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/27/obama-federal-government-charge-oil-spill-response/ Obama news conference, 5/27/10]</ref>}}

==The Obama plan ==
[[File:OCS Eastern Gulf of Mexico Strategy.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Map of expanded areas of offshore oil drilling authorized by President Obama on 31 March 2010.<ref>[http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/2010/04/01/obama-offshore-oil-drilling-details.htm Obama Offshore Oil Drilling Details,] 1 April 2010. Retrieved from About.com Guide to US Government Info 16 May 2010.</ref> ''Source: United States Department of Interior.'']]
Obama called for expanded development and production throughout the [[Gulf of Mexico]]. The [[Department of Interior]]'s [[Minerals Management Service]] (MMS) estimates that the Gulf of Mexico contains 36-41.5 billion barrels of oil and 161-207 trillion cubic feet of natural gas resources. According a DOI press release, Obama's plan would "expand oil and gas development and exploration" while "protecting fisheries, [[tourism]], and places off U.S. coasts that are not appropriate for development."<ref>[http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/2010_03_31_release.cfm Department of Interior Press Release,] 31 March 2010.</ref>

The ''[[Associated Press]]'' has reported on the role ex-government regulators play in [[lobby]]ing and influence; the chief of staff of the MSS's Gulf of Mexico region once stated that deep water drilling had "few or no regulations or standards."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/a-2649320~INFLUENCE_GAME__Govt_regulators_hired_by_companies.html INFLUENCE GAME: Govt regulators hired by companies,] Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010. Retrieved from examiner.com 26 May 2010.</ref> Two years later the senior official left his job in the MMS to work for BP.<ref>Ibid.</ref> During President Obama's first year in office, as BP's regulatory compliance and environmental manager, the ex-MMS official lobbied the U.S. Ocean Policy Task Force to "carefully weigh policies that may establish exclusionary zones" or "disrupt the MMS leasing program," according to a statement posted at whitehouse.gov.<ref>Influence Game, Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010.</ref> He further stated that BP wanted access to off-limit areas such as the eastern [[Gulf of Mexico]]<ref>Ibid.</ref> which President Obama approved in March 2010.

Total U.S. offshore [[crude oil]] production in 2009 was 1.7 million barrels a day, of which 1.6 million barrels a day came from the U.S. section of the Gulf of Mexico.<ref>[http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/info_glance/petroleum.html Energy Information Administration.]</ref>

According to the ''New York Times'', President Obama "said several times during his [[Barack Hussein Obama 2008 Presidential campaign|presidential campaign]] that he supported expanded offshore drilling. He noted in his [[State of the Union]] address<ref>[http://www.c-span.org/Executive/State-of-the-Union.aspx Barack Obama State of the Union Address 2010]. Retrieved from [[C-SPAN]].org 15 May 2010.</ref> in January [2010] that weaning the country from imported oil would require “tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development.”<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/science/earth/31energy.html Obama to Open Offshore Areas to Oil Drilling for First Time,] John M. Broder, ''[[New York Times]]'', March 30, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/03/obama_clears_way_for_oil_drill.html Obama clears way for oil drilling off U.S. coasts], Associated Press, March 31, 2010, Retrieved from nola.com 8 May 2010.</ref>

Nobel Laureate in Economics, Dr. [[Paul Krugman]],<ref>[http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2008/ Economics 2008.] Retrieved from Nobel.org 10 May 2010.</ref> who has been highly critical of Obama [[Obama administration corporate bailouts|economic policy]]<ref>[http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090331151429.aspx Krugman Garners Newsweek Cover for Left-Wing Criticism of [[Obamunism|Obamanomics,]] ] Julia A. Seymour, ''Business & Media Institute'', 3/31/09.</ref> in his regular ''New York Times'' column, ''Conscience of a Liberal'' wrote a piece entitled "The oil spill is Obama's fault," and stated "that’s not what I believe....The only question is what the story will be."<ref>[http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/the-oil-spill-is-obamas-fault/?src=twt&twt=NytimesKrugman The Oil Spill Is Obama’s Fault,] Paul Krugman, ''New York Times '' Op-Ed, 30 April 2010.</ref> When questioned about the Obama regulators "cozy relationship" with oil companies the president responded, "absolutely I take responsibility for that."<ref>[http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-gulf-oil-spill Remarks by President Obama on the Gulf Oil Spill,] Office of the Press Secretary, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 29 May 2010.</ref>
=== Obama administration asks Court to allow BP drilling in the Gulf of Mexico ===

Less than four months after [[President Barack Obama]] took office a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. found that the U.S. Government was unprepared for a major spill at sea, relying on an "irrational" environmental analysis of the risks of offshore drilling. The Obama administration urged the court to revisit the decision. In its arguments to the court, the Obama administration said that the loss of royalties on the oil, estimated at almost $10 billion, "may have significant financial consequences for the federal government."

Among the existing leases was the Lease Sale #206. That deal included BP's acquisition, for $34 million, of the acreage encompassing the Deep Water Horizons well.

A day after the administration's petition, the industry's main lobbying group, the American Petroleum Institute, made its own case echoing the government's arguments. "The significance of [Gulf of Mexico] activities under the five-year program cannot be overstated," the API argued.

Secretary [[Ken Salazar]] expressed confidence that problems within the [[Minerals Management Service]] that led to poor oversight of offshore drilling were resolved. In September 2009, in testimony before the House Natural Resources Committee, Salazar listed steps he had taken to make sure problems "don't occur in the future."

In [[Senate]] hearings held in mid-November 2009, Obama MMS Deputy Director Walter Cruickshank assured the Committee panel fears of containing a catastrophic blowout were misplaced, saying the U.S. had "what we believe is the most aggressive oil spill contingency planning...in the world."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704699604575342843359124882.html</ref>

=== Approval of BP's response plan ===
The [[Obama administration]] accepted and approved BP's regional oil spill response plan for the [[Gulf of Mexico]] dated 30 June 2009<ref>[http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1351 Did anyone actually read BP's oil spill response plan?] Walruses and Seals, Non-Existent Equipment Lists and Other Fanciful References, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from peer.org 19 June 2010.</ref> and covered all the company’s operations in the Gulf. The plan lists
:*“Sea Lions, Seals, Sea Otters [and] [[Walrus]]es” as “Sensitive Biological Resources” in the Gulf, suggesting that portions were cribbed from previous [[Arctic]] exploratory planning;
:* Gives a web site for a [[Japan]]ese home shopping site as the link to one of its “primary equipment providers for BP in the Gulf of Mexico Region [for] rapid deployment of spill response resources on a 24 hour, 7 days a week basis;” and
:* Directs its media spokespeople to never make “promises that [[property]], [[ecology]], or anything else will be restored to normal.”<ref>http://www.mms.gov/DeepwaterHorizon/BP_Regional_OSRP_Redactedv2.pdf</ref>

The government approved plan made no mention about tracking sub-surface oil plumes from deepwater blowouts or preventing [[disease]] ([[virus]]es, [[bacteria]], etc.) transmission to captured [[animal]]s in rehabilitation facilities.

=== British Petroleum ===
During the first 100 days of the [[Obama administration]], the Minerals Management Service ([[MMS]]) of the [[Department of the Interior]] granted a “categorical exclusion” from a detailed environmental impact statement required under [[law]]<ref>[http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/nepa/nepaeqia.htm The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.]</ref> to BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling operation, according to the ''[[Washington Post]].''<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html U.S. exempted BP's Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study,] Juliet Eilperin, ''Washington Post,'' 5 May 2010.</ref> BP's exploration plan received in the Administration's MMS field office on 23 March 2009 states "no mitigation measures other than those required by regulation and BP policy will be employed to avoid, diminish or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources." It declared any spill would have only "sub-lethal" effects on fish and marine [[mammal]]s but it was "unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities."<ref>http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/initial_exploration_plan050410.pdf</ref>

As Senator, and while running for president, [[Barack Obama]] received a total of $77,051 from BP<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/BP?view=detail&siteid=nwhwk</ref> and has taken more money from BP's [[Political Action Committee]] and individuals connected with BP over the past 20 years than any other candidate, according to [[FEC]] disclosure records.<ref>[http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0505/obama-biggest-recipient-bp-political-action-money-20-years Obama is biggest recipient of BP’s political action cash in the last 20 years,] John Byrne, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from rawstory.com 9 May 2010.</ref> Likewise, the independent watchdog Center for Responsive Politics noted, "the “top recipient of BP-related donations during the 2008 cycle was President Barack Obama himself.”<ref>Jake Tapper, Political Punch, [[ABC News]], 5 May 2010. [http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/white-house-idea-that-bp-given-special-exemption-because-of-campaign-cash-to-obama-silly-and-ridiculous.html?cid=6a00d8341c4df253ef0134807669a3970c]</ref><ref>http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/04/on-thursday-oil-giant-bp.html</ref>
[[File:Bp-obama-logo.jpg|right|225px|thumb|Obama approved drilling permits for BP without the statutory requirement to file an environmental impact assessment,<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?partner=rss&emc=rss U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits,] Ian Urbina, ''New York Times'', 13 May 2010.</ref> the handling of spills in a worst-case scenario,<ref>[http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2010/bp-exempted-05-05-2010.html Interior Department Exempted BP Drilling From Environmental Review]: In Rush to Expand Offshore Oil Drilling, Interior Secretary Salazar Abandoned Pledge to Reform
Industry-dominated Mineral Management Service. Press Release, Center for Biological Diversity, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from www.biologicaldiversity.org, 30 May 2010.</ref> and fostered a cozy relationship between government and the oil industry.<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=10745153 Govt Regulators Hired by Companies, Influence Game: Drilling regulators move from government to industry through revolving door,] Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010. Retrieved from abcnews.go.com 30 May 2010.</ref> No other candidate took more money from BP in the past two decades than Obama received in only six years.<ref>[http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html Obama biggest recipient of BP cash,] Erika Lovley, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from Politico.com 30 May 2010.</ref>]]
Talk show personality Ed Schultz of [[MSNBC]] reiterated a call for campaign finance reform as a result of Barack Obama's ties to BP and the government's response.<ref>[http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100602102656.aspx MSNBC's Schultz Draws Bizarre Connection Between Oil Spill and Campaign Finance Reform.] Alex Fitzsimmons, Media Research Center, 2 June 2010.</ref>

Transocean, owner of the Deepwater Horizons drilling rig leased to BP, was the recipient of the Obama [[Mineral Management Service]]'s, ''Safety Award for Excellence''.<ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=66303 Democratic Leader Hoyer Doesn’t Know Whether Obama Administration was Prepared for Oil Spill,] Matt Cover, CNSNews.com, May 20, 2010.</ref><ref>MMS Thought Deepwater Horizon was Award-Winningly SAFE, The Project on Government Oversight, Exposing Government Corruption, 29 April 2010.</ref> On 30 April 2010 Transocean's stock fell after [[President Obama]]’s chief strategist, [[David Axelrod]], made comments nine days into the disaster and the [[government]] raised estimates to more than fives times of what had previously been reported about how much oil was leaking into the [[Gulf of Mexico]].<ref>[http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-30/transocean-drops-after-axelrod-comments-on-drilling-update2-.html Transocean Drops After Axelrod Comments on Drilling,] Edward Klump, ''Bloomberg Business Week'', 30 April 2010. Retrieved 2 June 2010.</ref>

It has been reported in the [[finance|financial]] press that among owners of BP<ref>[http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-aims-at-bp-hits-state-pensions-2010-06-09 President Obama's ramped up rhetoric over the BP oil spill is beginning to have an effect,] ''MarketWatch, 9 June 2010.</ref> are
*New Jersey Division of Investment (51 million shares)
*California Public Employees Retirement System (36 million shares)
*Pennsylvania Public School Employees Retirement System (7.1 million shares)
*Teachers Retirement System of Alabama (4.5 million shares)
*Employees Retirement System of Texas (4.1 million shares)
*Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (1.1 million shares)
*Illinois State Board of Investment (1.1 million shares)<ref>In 1990 Barack Obama took a job with the Law Firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland ([http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/06/nation/na-obamalegal6 Obama's lawyer days: brief and not all civil rights,] Dan Morain, ''Los Angeles Times'' 2008-04-06). Allison S. Davis, a senior partner in the firm, went into business with [[Chicago]] slumlord [[Tony Rezko]]. Davis was appointed to the Illinois State Board of Investment by Governor [[Rod Blagojevich]] at Rezko's request in 2003. ([http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/644511 How reform-minded City Hall critic became a cozy insider,] Tim Novak, ''Chicago Sun-Times'', 2007-11-11).</ref>
*Indiana Public Employees' Retirement Fund (0.7 million shares)
*Washington State Investment Board (1.2 million shares)
*United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund (21.9 million shares).

BP was found [[Negligence|wilfully negligent]] during the [[Bush administration]] in a [[Texas]] refinery explosion incident, and was assessed $108 million in fines - the highest workplace safety fines in U.S. history.<ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/16/60minutes/main6490197_page5.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody Blowout: The Deepwater Horizon Disaster,] ''[[60 Minutes]]'', 16 May 2010. Retrieved from cbsnews.com, 2 June 2010.</ref>

=== Nalco and Corexit ===
[[File:Dermatitis4.jpg|right|375px|thumb|Dermatitis is one immediate health concern<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/28/bp-gulf-oil-spill-pollution Gulf oil spill is public health risk, environmental scientists warn,] Suzanne Goldenberg, ''[[Guardian (uk)]]'', 28 May 2010.</ref> of the [[Obama administration]]'s decision to use [[toxic]] substances to disperse the visibility of the spill.
[http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CB4QFjAD&url=http://www.chemie.uni-regensburg.de/Physikalische_Chemie/Kunz/student/Uebung_Formulierung/Clark_presentation.pdf&rct=j&q=photo+dermatitis+corexit&ei=qn0ITPGEM-qXlAfeo8TSAQ&usg=AFQjCNHp_FTjbxFEzZI4o9iMcapG_kFO3Q&sig2=zxmIoVnIi2vekrq3WB6ztA]Residents, cleanup workers, and tourists alike may be affected. [http://chealth.canoe.ca/channel_health_news_details.asp?news_id=31005&news_channel_id=145&channel_id=145] ]]
Nalco of Naperville, Illinois formed a joint venture with Exxon Chemical in 1994 and the company's current leadership includes several executives from BP. Nalco reported it sold in excess of $40 million to BP of its dispersant, Corexit, shortly after the [[Gulf of Mexico]] oil spill disaster.

Of 18 dispersants approved by the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA), 12 were found to be more effective on southern [[Louisiana]] crude than Corexit, EPA data show.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/business/energy-environment/13greenwire-less-toxic-dispersants-lose-out-in-bp-oil-spil-81183.html Less Toxic Dispersants Lose Out in BP Oil Spill Cleanup,]
Paul Quinlan, ''Greenwire'', May 13, 2010. Retrieved from nytimes.com 25 May 2010.</ref> Two of the 12 were found to be 100 percent effective on [[Gulf of Mexico]] crude, whereas two Corexit products rated only 56 percent and 63 percent effective.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The [[toxic]]ity of the other 12 was shown to be in some cases 10 or 20 times less than Corexit, according to the EPA.<ref>Ibid.</ref> "It's a chemical that the oil industry makes to sell to itself, basically," said Richard Charter, a senior policy adviser for Defenders of Wildlife.<ref>Ibid.</ref>

Corexit was found to be one of the most toxic dispersal agents ever developed.<ref>''Acute Aquatic Toxicity of Three Corexit Products: An Overview'', Anita George-Ares and James R. Clark. Report prepared for Exxon Biomedical Sciences.</ref> With seasonal warming of water temperature the toxicity grows. Corexit is banned in the [[United Kingdom]] due to [[environment]]al concerns.<ref>[http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/05/epa-bp-dispersants Why Is the EPA Letting BP Use Dirty Dispersants?], Kate Sheppard, ''Mother Jones'', 19 May 19 2010.</ref> The Obama EPA gave BP the green light to apply Corexit to the spill.<ref>Ibid.</ref> At the Congressional hearing investigating the Gulf oil spill disaster, [[Democratic]] Representative Jerrold Nadler of [[New York]] raised the prospect of "thousands and thousands of people getting sick or dying" as a result of the administration's sanctioned use of the dispersant.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/science/earth/28workers.html Worry About Dispersant Rises as Men in Work Crew Complain of Health Problems,] Leslie Kaufman and Elizabeth Rosenthal, ''New York Times'', 27 May 2010.</ref> Critics allege use of dispersants like Corexit are largely for cosmetic purposes. Nalco has been a frequent contributor to the campaign of Sen. [[Mary Landrieu]]<ref>http://saveourwetlands.org/index-landrieu.html/</ref> of Louisiana.<ref>http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/fec/?id=273&cycle=2007-2008</ref>

== Deepwater Horizon ==
[[File:Deepwater Horizon Fire.jpg|right|250px|thumb|Fire boat response crews battle the blazing remnants of the off shore oil rig Deepwater Horizon, April 21, 2010 (U.S. Coast Guard)]]
On [[Earth Day]] 2010, a BP-leased oil drilling rig sank to the bottom of the [[Gulf of Mexico]] two days after it exploded, creating what has been described as the "worst environmental disaster in [[American History Lectures|US history]]."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/x-33986-Political-Spin-Examiner~y2010m4d29-Worst-environmental-disaster-in-US-history-Oil-slick-in-Gulf-of-Mexico-is-set-on-fire Worst environmental disaster in US history,] Maryann Tobin, ''Examiner'', April 29, 2010.</ref> [[Secretary of the Interior]] [[Ken Salazar]] told [[CNN]] "It potentially is catastrophic," and "I think we have to prepare for the worst."<ref>[http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/gulf-oil-spill:-impossible-to-measure-impact-of-%22unprecedented-environmental-disaster%22-477603.html?tickers=BP,HAL,CAM,RIG,XLE,OIL,USO Gulf Oil Spill: Impossible to Measure Impact of "Unprecedented Environmental Disaster",] Aaron Task, May 03, 2010. Retrieved from Yahoo Finance 12 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/02/salazar-oil-spill-massive-and-a-potential-catastrophe/ Salazar: Oil spill 'massive' and a potential catastrophe,] [[CNN]], 3 May 2010.</ref>

Congressional investigators think they have identified the rigs blowout preventer as the cause of the explosion. <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703339304575240323493707434.html Congress Homes In on Rig's Blowout Preventer,] Ben Casselman and Jennifer Levitz, ''Wall Street Journal Online,'' 13 May 2010.</ref> The blowout preventer was leaking hydraulic fluid, had a dead battery,<ref>Ibid.</ref> and was inspected by the Obama [[Minerals Management Service]] (MMS) only two weeks before to the explosion<ref>White House Press Office, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/press-briefing-bp-oil-spill-gulf-coast Press Briefing on the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf Coast,] 29 April 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 12 May 2010.</ref> which killed 11 people. [[Amy Goodman]], a [[leftist]] radio talk show host, has suggested those responsible should be [[prosecute]]d for [[manslaughter]].<ref>[http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/law_order_corporate_crime_unit_20100518/ Law & Order,] Amy Goodman, 18 May 2010. Retrieved from truthdigg.com 30 May 2010.</ref>

Blowout preventers are meant to shut off the well, and the last line of defense is a set of shear rams which cut the pipe and seal off the well.<ref>Congress Homes In on Rig's Blowout Preventer, Ben Casselman and Jennifer Levitz, ''WSJ Online,'' 13 May 2010.</ref> The MMS, the [[Obama administration]] agency that regulates offshore drilling along with the Coast Guard, is supposed to require proof that shear rams are powerful enough to shut the well. Michael Saucier, MMS's regional supervisor testified before Congress that the MMS did not require BP to file a "scenario for potential blowout."<ref>Ibid.</ref> The MMS certified that BP "has the capacity to respond, to the maximum extent practicable, to a worst-case discharge, or a substantial threat of such a discharge."<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/29/gulf-oil-spill-exceeds-bp_n_556798.html</ref>

A May 2010 Inspector General's report revealed at least two MMS regulatory inspectors admitted to being under the influence of the [[illegal drug]] [[methamphetamine]] while on the job.<ref>[http://www.wusf.usf.edu/news/2010/05/25/drugs_free_football_tickets_and_porn_at_minerals_management_service Drugs, Free Football Tickets and Porn at Minerals Management Service,] 25 May 2010. Retrieved from wusf.usf.edu 26 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.tgdaily.com/business-and-law-features/49932-us-bureaucrats-smoked-crystal-meth-watched-porn-as-bp-oil-rig-blew US bureaucrats smoked crystal meth, watched porn as BP oil rig blew,] Starr Keshet, 25 May 2010. Retrieved from tgdaily.com 26 May 2010.</ref>

==Environmental disaster ==
[[File:Oil slick map.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Projections of the flow of the spill over the summer of 2010. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37497578/ns/local_news-new_york_ny/] ]]
On 29 April 2010 oil began washing ashore in Plaquemines Parish, [[Louisiana]]; four weeks later local leaders still were begging [[President Obama]] for federal assistance in responding to the disaster which was overtaking hundreds of miles of shoreline.<ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/26/gulf.oil.spill.plaquemines/index.html Plaquemines Parish president blasts federal response to oil spill,] CNN, 26 May 2010.</ref>

Crude oil has washed into marshes, estuaries and onto beaches in [[Mississippi]] and [[Alabama]]. Wildlife has been killed and efforts are underway to save oil-coated
birds. Without capping the well [[Florida]]'s Everglades may be turned into a "dead zone." Scientists expect currents to carry the oil slick to the eastern seaboard of the [[United States]], fouling beaches and estuaries like the [[Chesapeake Bay]] and fishing grounds of the Grand Banks off [[Newfoundland]].

=== Silverfish ===

Most scientists agree that Corexit 9500 will have a much larger biological effect when it reaches coastal areas teeming with wildlife.<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref> Many species are being threatened at a crucial time in their life cycle.<ref>[http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2818588720100428 FACTBOX-Possible environmental impact of Gulf oil spill,] ''[[Reuters]]'', 28 April 2010.</ref> In testing done by the U.S. [[Environmental Protection Agency]] the dispersant Corexit 9500 was found to be extremely lethal to silverfish, a benchmark [[organism]] in [[toxic]]ity testing.<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>

=== Gulf menhaden ===

Gulf menhaden are a [[specie]]s harvested mostly for fish meal and fish oil. Menhaden could be badly affected
by the spill.

=== Coral, oyster and shrimp ===

Corals, oyster and shrimp likewise are critically affected. Richard Charter, a foremost expert on marine biology and oil spills who is a senior policy advisor for Marine Programmes for Defenders of Wildlife and is chairman of the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council has said, “There is a [[chemical]] [[toxic]]ity to the dispersant compound that in many ways is worse than oil,” which "in so doing you may be more seriously damaging the ecosystem offshore.”<ref>Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic. Retreived from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref> Shrimp were found to be extremely vulnerable to the lethal effects of the chemical dispersant Corexit 9500 used by [[Obama administration]] disaster relief agencies and BP in testing done by the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA).<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>

=== Brown pelican ===
[[File:Dead birds and sea turtles.jpg|right|325px|thumb|Dead birds and sea turtles. ]]
The [[Louisiana]] state bird, the Brown Pelican, was removed from protection under the U.S. Endangered Species Act in 2009. The Obama administration approved BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling rig without the proper environmental impact assessment (EIA) required by law. The disaster occurred just as breeding season commenced.

=== Other bird species ===

Other species endangered by the oil spill are American oystercatcher and Wilson's plover.

=== Sea turtles ===

As several species of sea turtles move through the Gulf during their spring nesting season, they need to surface to breathe.

=== Toxic oil spill rain ===
A report prepared by the [[Russia]]n Ministry of Natural Resources warned that the leaking [[crude oil]] into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] is about to become the worst [[environment]]al catastrophe in all of human history, threatening the entire eastern half of [[North America]] with “total destruction.” Russian scientists based the assessment on the use of millions of gallons of the government approved chemical dispersant Corexit.

The Russian scientists outlined that Corexit, with its 2.61ppm [[toxic]]ity level, combined with the seasonal warming of Gulf of Mexico waters, the [[molecule]]s will be able to “phase transition” from their present [[liquid]] to a gaseous state allowing them to be absorbed into clouds and released as “toxic rain” upon all of Eastern North America.

The scientists warned should a [[Hurricane Katrina]] like storm form in the Gulf while tens of millions of gallons of Corexit are floating on or near the surface, the resulting “toxic rain” falling upon the North American continent could “theoretically” destroy all microbial life to any depth it reaches resulting in an “unimaginable environmental catastrophe” destroying all kinds of life forms.<ref>[http://www.eutimes.net/2010/05/toxic-oil-spill-rains-warned-could-destroy-north-america/ Toxic oil spill rains warned could destroy North America,'] EUTimes, 24 May 2010. Retrieved 3 June 2010.</ref>

== The response ==

Initially [[Department of Homeland Security]] and the [[U.S. Coast Guard]] reported on 23 April 2010 there was no leak from the sunken oil rig.<ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-04-23-deepwater-horizon_N.htm Coast Guard: No oil leaking from sunken rig,] Rick Jervis, ''[[USA TODAY]]'', 23 April 2010.</ref> The next day the [[Obama administration]] officially estimated a leak from the sunken well at 1000 barrels per day.<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/24/oil-rig-deepwater-horizon_0_n_550849.html Oil Rig, Deepwater Horizon, Leaking Into Gulf Of Mexico,] Cain Burdeau, 4 April 2010. Retrieved from the ''[[Huffington Post]],'' 15 May 2010.</ref> The ''[[Associated Press]]'' reported it took nine days after the explosion and loss of life before President Obama made his first comments on the disaster.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100509/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_gulf_oil_spill_obama_s_response Obama oil response: aggressive as crisis unfolded,] ,H. Josef Hebert and Erica Werner, ''Associated Press'', 9 May 2010. Retrieved from news.yahoo.com 2 June 2010.</ref> BP's stock fell<ref>[http://in.reuters.com/article/idINLDE63S0HR20100429 European shares turn negative; BP falls,] ''Reuters'' 29 April 2010.</ref> on news of the "the worsening oil spill" and administration estimates were raised to 5000 barrels per day.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/29/us/29spill.html Size of Spill in Gulf of Mexico Is Larger Than Thought,] Campbell Robertson and Leslie Kaufman, ''New York Times,'' 28 April 2010. Retrieved 15 May 2010.</ref> and appointed a national incident commander.<ref>http://wallstcheatsheet.com/breaking-news/a-timeline-of-the-bp-oil-spill-crisis-pics/?p=10743/</ref>

=== U.S. Government dumps toxic dispersants into the Gulf of Mexico ===
[[File:Dispersants spraying.jpg|left|300px|thumb|Aerial image of the [[United States]] [[government]]'s dumping [[toxic]] disperants into the [[Gulf of Mexico]]. ]]
''Wired Science'' reports the [[Obama administration]] disaster-relief agencies are using a toxic chemical to disperse oil in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster. Use of dispersants are said to be a public relations strategy.<ref>[http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/05/gulf-dispersants/ Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative,] Brandon Keim, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from ''Wired Science'' 15 May 2010.</ref> Secretary [[Janet Napolitano]] of the [[Department of Homeland Security]] acknowledged<ref>[http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/ Obama: Oil spill bill on BP, Chem spray to save nature,] Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Updates, 04th May 2010. Retrieved from oilspillupdates.com 29 May 2010.</ref> the U.S government was dumping toxic chemicals from [[C-130]] cargo aircraft onto the spill.<ref>[http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2010-05-02/news/os-oil-disaster-chemical-cleanup-20100502_1_dispersant-spill-crude Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix,] Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref> Jackie Savitz of the ocean-conservation group Oceana stated the use of dispersants is only slightly less horrendous than the Gulf oil spill itself. "You're basically pouring chemicals into the ocean, which is never a good thing."<ref>Ibid.</ref> According to a 2009 [[Environmental Protection Agency]] report dispersants have not been used in the United State prior to the Obama administration's approval at BP'S request "because of possible long-term environmental effects, difficulties with timely and effective application, disagreement among [[scientist]]s and research data about their environmental effects, effectiveness, and [[toxic]]ity concerns" and the effects "are still unknown."<ref>Ibid.</ref> Residents in areas close to the oil spill have reported odors and symptoms such as [[headache]]s, dizziness, [[nausea]], eye irritation, and respiratory problems.<ref>[http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/gsolomon/gulf_oil_spill_air_quality_upd.html Gulf Oil Spill Air Quality,] Gina Solomon, 24 May 2010. Retrieved from Natural Resources Defense Council Staff Blog, 3 June 2010.</ref>

=== Disregard for worker safety ===
[[File:Cleaup300.jpg|right|275px|thumb|Cleanup workers exposed to the Obama adminsitration's decision to use known [[toxic]] substances to disperse the spill. Critics allege dispersants are ineffective and largely for cosmetic purposes. ]]
The ''[[Guardian (uk)]]'' has reported the controversy over Corexit exposes the [[Obama administration]] to criticism that its scientific agencies have been too accommodating to BP's strategy. In addition to the use of Corexit, the Obama [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA) came under fire for withholding test results on the toxicity of the water close to shore.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/20/gulf-oil-spill-chemical-dispersant</ref>

The dispersant 2-BE is known to cause heath dangers to clean up workers<ref>http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/gsolomon/oil_spill_clean-up_workers_get.html</ref> and wildlife alike.<ref>[http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2010/chem_dispersants_work_at_cost Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic.] Retrieved from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref> 2-BE has been documented to cause the breakdown of [[red blood cell]]s, leading to blood in urine and feces, and can damage the kidneys, liver, spleen and [[bone marrow]] of humans – effects not included on the information sheet for workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The dispersant Corexit 9500 is associated with headaches, vomiting and reproductive problems as sides effects to clean-up workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref> Lawrence Duffy of the University of Alaska claims dispersants "are more a public relations measure than a preventive one. It has an effect on our psychology because we don't see the oil slick,"<ref>Ibid.</ref> though oil particles continue to do damage.<ref>Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix, Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref>

=== Government mismanagement of relief efforts ===

Three weeks into the disaster [[National Public Radio]] reported the [[Obama administration]]'s official figures were still grossly underestimated<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126809525 Gulf Spill May Far Exceed Official Estimates,] Richard Harris, ''National Public Radio,'' 14 May 2010.</ref> and after the first month it was finally admitted the spill was nearly three times larger than earlier thought.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/us/28flow.html Estimates Suggest Spill Is Biggest in U.S. History,] Tom Zeller, Jr., ''New York Times'', 27 May 2010.</ref>

Federal officials did not begin burning the leaking oil off the surface of the water until one full week after the rig collapsed.<ref>[http://blog.al.com/live/2010/04/burning_should_have_started_a.html Burning should have started a week ago, former NOAA official says,] Ben Raines, ''Mobile Press-Register'', 29 April 2010.</ref> Louisiana Governor [[Bobby Jindal]] criticized [[President Obama]] for his slow response.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzEntQPr9OA</ref> ''The New York Times'' castigated the [[White House]] for delays and not moving quick enough, calling the evidence "damning" and declaring the Gulf oil spill a "huge disaster whose consequences might have been minimized with swifter action" from the [[Obama administration]].<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/01/opinion/01sat1.html Unanswered Questions on the Spill,] ''New York Times'' Editorial, 30 April 2010.</ref> One month into the spill, [[Democrat]]ic stalwarts [[James Carville]],<ref>[http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2521614/posts Is James Carville racist?], 26 May 2010. Retrieved from freerepublic.com 30 May 2010.</ref> [[Chris Matthews]],<ref>http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37632.html#ixzz0om46RhGH</ref> and Donna Brazile<ref>http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/99375-donna-brazile-calls-obamas-oil-spill-response-not-tough-enough</ref> criticized the inept and bungled response to the spreading catastrophe.
[[File:Finalisttransoce.jpeg|left|250px|thumb|Chris Oynes (left) of the Mineral Management Service presents Keelan Adamson (right) of Transocean the MMS's, ''Safety Award for Excellence'' (SAFE),<ref>http://www.mms.gov/awards/SAFEcriteria.htm</ref> at the MMS National Award luncheon, 7 May 2009.<ref>http://www.beaconmag.com/gomrigteamswinmm.html</ref> ''Source: Beacon magazine'']]
The [[White House]] lacked any type of plan to combat the disaster. [[U.S. House of Representatives|House]] Democratic Majority Leader [[Steny Hoyer]] publicly admitted that the [[Obama Administration]] was ill-prepared to deal with the situation. <ref>[http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2010/04/mms-thought-deepwater-horizon-was-awardwinningly-safe.html MMS Thought Deepwater Horizon was Award-Winningly SAFE,] The Project on Government Oversight, Exposing Government Corruption, 29 April 2010.</ref> While the disaster steadily grew, Obama did not discuss the crisis at length until he appeared at a photo op at Venice, Louisiana on 3 May 2010.<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126467960 Obama Says Oil Spill Damage Could Be Unprecedented,] Scott Horsley, [[NPR]], 3 May 2010.</ref> He would order a moratorium on all future deep sea oil platforms until they determine the problems associated with the current situation. As to be expected, Obama tries to remove himself from blame saying "the system failed", this despite the fact the he heads the system. Then he pointed fingers of blame at oil companies while taking an indirect jab at the Bush administration. <ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20005039-503544.html Angry Obama Seeks to Deflect Blame for Gulf Oil Spill Crisis, CBS, May 14, 2010]</ref>
{{cquote|For too long, for a decade or more, there has been a cozy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agency that permits them to drill. It seems as if permits were too often issued based on little more than assurances of safety from the oil companies. That cannot and will not happen anymore.}}
White House spokesman [[Robert Gibbs]] did his best to put a good spin on the disaster claiming the response was "comprehensive and fast." Meanwhile, the [[Democrat]]-led Congress ordered public hearings from oil executives. President Obama blamed others saying the answers from oil executives were a "ridiculous spectacle," "You had executives of BP and Transocean and Halliburton falling over each other to point the finger of blame at somebody else." <ref>[http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/burning_rig_of_fire_VkeuMCffwTUd9IBS7gUV7K?CMP=OTC-rss&FEEDNAME=#ixzz0oWm4u9zQ New look at Gulf oil spill as cleanup continues, NYPost, May 15, 2010]</ref> As the disaster progressed and questions arose over the government's misreporting and withholding<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/bp-feds-withheld-videos-showing-massive-scope-oil/story?id=10819367 BP and Feds Withheld Videos Showing Massive Scope of Oil Spill:] Coast Guard Told Public Not to 'Fixate' On Rate of Spill While Sitting On Video, Brian Ross, Matthew York, and Avni Patel, ABC News, 3 June 2010.</ref> of information from the [[public]] about the true dimensions of the calamity, the ''[[Associated Press]]'' noted,
{{cquote|First [Obama] was going to make BP pay for the Gulf oil mess. Then he declared himself in charge. Now he's trying to find out 'whose ass to kick' and making clear he'd fire BP's chief if only he could.<ref>http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100608/D9G7C5U00.html</ref>}}
[[File:Energy Tax bill.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Estimated impact of Obama Energy Tax in job losses. Total job loss: 2.2 million. ''Source: National Black Chamber of Commerce'' [http://www.nationalbcc.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=750:nbcc-study-generates-concerns-about-waxmanmarkey-climate-change-bill-costs-are-high-but-benefits-are-uncertain&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=7] ]]
=== Revitalizing cap and trade energy tax ===
:''Main article:'' '''[[Cap and trade]]'''
[[President Obama]] has been roundly criticized by [[Democrat]]s and [[Republican]]s alike for attempting to use the [[nation]]al tragedy to revitalized his failed Cap and Trade energy proposals. The Obama proposal, widely perceived as a job-killer tax increase, has stalled in the [[U.S. Senate]]. [[California]] Senator [[Dianne Feinstein]] has stated the climate bill "isn't going to stop the oil leak."<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/15/obamas-pitch-energy-speech-gulf-crisis-infuriates-republicans/ Obama Draws Bipartisan Criticism for Using Oil Spill to Push Energy Policy,] [[FOXNews]].com, 16 June 2010.</ref>

[[Environmentalist]]s want the President to push the program. Fred Krupp of the Environmental Defense Fund calls the opportunity "a political moment" to pass a carbon tax estimated to cost the average U.S. household $4300 per year.<ref>[http://blog.heritage.org/2009/05/15/the-4300-energy-tax/ The $4300 Energy Tax,] Nicolas Loris, 15 May 2009. Retrieved from Heritage.org, 19 June 2010.</ref>

Joel Benenson, who conducted polling for Obama’s presidential campaign, thinks the tax increase could pass, but wary Senate Democrats say otherwise. “There’s not a great call for it" said [[West Virginia]] Democratic Senator [[Jay Rockefeller]]. “It’s unrelated” to the immediate crisis in the Gulf noted Senator [[Ben Nelson]], Democrat from [[Nebraska]].<ref>[http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-16/democrats-say-climate-bill-lacks-momentum-after-spill-update3-.html Democrats Say Climate Bill Lacks Momentum After Spill,] Lisa Lerer and Simon Lomax, ''Bloomberg'', 16 June 2010. </ref>

=== Assistance of foreign governments ===
Nearly two-months after the disaster took place, the Obama administration decides to utilize the assistance offered by 17 countries, the U.N and the European Union. <ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/13/AR2010061304232.html After delays, [[U.S.]] begins to tap foreign aid for gulf oil spill, WaPo, June 14, 2010]</ref> International aid offers already accepted include two skimmers and 2.6 miles (4.2 kilometers) of boom from [[Mexico]], three sets of sweeping arm systems from the Netherlands and 1.86 miles (3.0 kilometers) of boom from Canada, the State Department said. The State Department noted that it has assisted BP in directly sourcing equipment and technical experts from around the world, including from Algeria, Australia, Bahrain, [[Brazil]], [[Canada]], China, Denmark, Latvia, Norway, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, and the [[United Kingdom]]. <ref>[http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/breakingnews/view/20100615-275709/US-taps-into-foreign-assistance-for-Gulf-oil-spill US taps into foreign assistance for Gulf oil spill, Agence France-Presse, June 15, 2010]</ref>

===Public relations offensive===
Faced with declining poll numbers and a public relations calamity, [[President Obama]] took to the airwaves nearly 60 days into the spill. A ''New York Times'' Op-ed commented,
{{cquote|All we got from President Obama was a vague call for some sort of new energy policy. Plus a Gulf Coast Restoration Plan, an oil spill study commission, a reminder that the secretary of energy won a Nobel Prize in physics and 17 references to God, prayer, blessings or faith.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/opinion/17collins.html The Boring Speech Policy,] Gail Collins, ''New York Times'' Op-ed, 16 June 2010.</ref><ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2010/06/17/behar-laments-shocking-bush-obama-garofalo-slams-anti-intellectual-pr Behar Panel Sees '[[Bush]]-Like' and '[[Corporatist]]' [[Obama]], [[Janeane Garofalo|Garofalo]] Slams 'Anti-Intellectual' [[Prayer]],] Joy Behar Show, [[CNN]]. Retrieved from newsbusters.org, 20 June 2010.</ref>}}
Former speechwriter for President [[Jimmy Carter]], [[Chris Matthews]], chided the President after his address to the nation,
{{cquote|Ludicrous that he keeps saying [Secretary of Energy] [[Steven Chu|Chu]] has a [[Nobel prize]]. I'll barf if he does it one more time.<ref>[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/06/15/msnbc_trashes_obamas_address_compared_to_carter_i_dont_sense_executive_command.html MSNBC Trashes Obama's Address: Compared To Carter, "I Don't Sense Executive Command,"]. Retrieved from RealClearPolitics.com, 20 June 2010.</ref>}}

==Economic impacts==
[[File:Oilslick.png|right|275px|thumb| Oil slick map as of May 30, 2010.]]
The economic impact of the [[Gulf of Mexico]] oil drilling disaster will be large and devastating to several key industries, including fishing, tourism, and transportation.<ref>[http://www.ihsglobalinsight.com/Perspective/PerspectiveDetail18638.htm Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Gulf Coast Oil Spill,] Nariman Behravesh, 4 May 2010. Retrieved from ihsglobalinsights.com 8 May 2020.</ref>

The top commercial species in terms of value are shrimp ($367 million), menhaden ($64 million), oysters ($59 million), and blue crab ($38 million).<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Fisheries Economics of the United States, Silver Spring, MD, 2008.</ref> As of 25 May 2010, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) closed 54,096 square miles to commercial and recreational fishing.<ref>http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/deepwater_horizon_oil_spill.htm</ref> These areas are some of the richest fishing grounds in the Gulf of Mexico for major commercial species such as white shrimp, blue crab, and oysters.

===Employment in fishing===
The most immediate economic impact of the oil spill has been on the Gulf fishing<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/video/asset/fishing-industry-hammered-by-gulf-oil-spill/41612D0E-B338-464D-A15E-5885B1D227D6</ref> industry. The number of [[job]]s at stake, which includes seafood processing and related wholesale and retail, is over 200,000 with related [[economic]] activity of $5.5 billion.<ref>[http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41262.pdf Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Selected Issues for Congress,] Curry L. Hagerty and Jonathan L. Ramseur, Congressional Research Service, 27 May 2010. (pdf p. 2.).</ref>

Dockside sales in [[Louisiana]] are approximately $660 million.<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Departtment of Commerce, [http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st5/publication/econ/2008/FEUS%202008%20ALL.pdf Fisheries Economics of the United States,] Silver Spring, MD, 2008. (pdf).</ref> Loses to the Louisiana fishing could be as high as $2.5 billion.<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/story/insurers-brace-for-liability-hit-from-oil-spill-2010-05-05</ref>

===Employment in tourism===

The tourist industry employs 620,000 people who earn over $9 billion in wages in the Gulf of Mexico region. Analysts say [[Florida]] alone could lose $3 billion in tourism.<ref>[http://www.royalgazette.com/rg/Article/article.jsp?articleId=7da532730030019&sectionId=65 Insurance industry concern grows over oil spill liability,] Alistair Barr, ''Royal Press Gazette'', 6 May 2010.</ref>

In 2008, recreational anglers took 25.4 million fishing trips and spent over $12 billion on equipment and trips in the Gulf region.<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Fisheries Economics of the United States, Silver Spring, MD, 2008.</ref> Some of the most popular recreational species include snappers, several types of drum, sheepshead, and Spanish mackerel. Recreational fisheries support businesses such as charters, bait and tackle, and services such as restaurants and hotels.

In 2000, 21.9 million people visited Gulf beaches and accounted for 177.2 million beach days.<ref>Brent Ache, David Bylsma, and Kristen Crossett, et al., The Gulf of Mexico at a Glance, National Ocean Service, NOAA, A Tool for the Gulf of Mexico Alliance and the American Public, Washington, DC, 2008. [http://gulfofmexicoalliance.org/pdfs/gulf_glance_1008.pdf pdf].</ref>

===Transportation===
The Offshore Marine Service Association (OMSA),<ref>[http://www.marinelog.com/DOCS/NEWSMMIX/2010jun00034.html OMSA slams offshore drilling moratorium,] 3 June 2010. Retrieved from Marinelog.com, 19 June 2010.</ref> the national trade association for U.S. flag vessels in the energy sector, criticized the [[Obama administration]]'s moratorium on offshore drilling projects. 100,000 jobs were immediately affected by the president's decision as companies began cancelling contracts to carry supplies, forcing layoffs. "The industry has struggled to climb out of a severe economic downturn. The moratorium threatens any hope of recovery and creates the potential for economic hardship that could last a decade or longer," remarked OMSA President Ken Wells.

OMSA estimates that for every mariner who works on-board a vessel, there are nine other Americans working in shore-side jobs that support vessel operations. Beyond the vessel crew, the negative consequences of the moratorium could impact everyone from service technicians supporting everything from diesel engines to the air condition systems to the local grocer who supplies food for the boat's galley.

Offshore vessels are a major part of the tax base in many coastal communities. Gulf Coast state and local government revenues will also decrease due to lower [[income tax]] and [[sales tax]] collections.

Disruption of shipping traffic in and out of the Port of [[New Orleans]] will impact barge, container, and tanker traffic in the Mississippi Delta and along the [[Mississippi River]]. Prices of all types of commodities would affected.

=== Insurance industry ===

BP, the operator on the oil drilling lease with a 65% stake, insured itself, rather than buying coverage from insurance companies. Industry analysts estimate total costs related to the oil spill cleanup and damages could exceed $14 billion. <ref>[http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKLDE6410IJ20100502 U.S. oil spill could bill could exceed $14 billion,] Tom Bergin, ''Reuters,'' 2 May 2010.</ref>

=== Lost revenue to state and local governments ===
:'''Louisiana'''
A Greater New Orleans study indicates the [[Obama administration]]'s moratorium could cost [[Louisiana]] as many as 22,000 jobs and more than $782 million in revenues.

With the average deepwater rig employing 230 workers with an average salary of $98,000, the study puts the tax revenue impact at $151 million if drilling were to resume within 18 months. Greater New Orleans President and CEO Michael Hecht says it’s difficult to be optimistic based on President Obama’s [[Oval Office]] address on 15 June 2010. President Obama's action “has the potential to turn an ecological tragedy into an economic calamity,” Hecht said.<ref>[http://neworleanscitybusiness.com/blog/2010/06/16/study-moratorium-could-cost-up-to-22000-jobs-782m-in-lost-revenue/ Study: Moratorium could cost up to 22,000 jobs, $782M in lost revenue,] Greg LaRose, ''New Orleans City Business'', 16 June 2010.</ref> The study foresees in a worse case scenario the loss of more than 22,000 jobs, 3,450 of them directly tied to the operating rigs and 18,945 with indirect ties such as catering firms and other companies that serve U.S energy producers.

Fearing that the drilling moratorium "could exacerbate, rather than alleviate, the impacts of this spill upon both our [[economy]] and our [[environment]]," U.S. Senator [[Mary Landrieu]] wrote to President Obama on 11 June 2010.<ref>http://landrieu.senate.gov/mediacenter/pressreleases/06-11-2010-1.cfm</ref> Landrieu stated,
{{Cquote|more than 300,000 Louisianians are employed either directly or indirectly by the oil and gas industry. ..The immediate impacts to the economy are devastating enough: idling the 33 rigs currently permitted to drill in the deepwater Gulf would immediately impact [[employment]] for roughly 38,000 crewmen, deck hands, engineers, welders, ROV operators, caterers, helicopter pilots, and others who operate and service these vessels. That's like closing 12 large motor vehicle assembly plants in one state, all at once.}}

Lost state and local tax revenues will accrue at a rate between $8 million and $15 million a month. Federal royalty losses will be substantial and a significant drop in tolls collected for the Louisiana Highway 1 bridge at Leeville, the main artery to the Port Fourchon energy port is projected as well.
:'''Texas'''
The [[Texas]] state comptroller’s office reported collection of $2.3 billion in oil and natural gas production taxes in fiscal year 2009 and $4.1 billion in 2008. The tax revenue is used to repair roads and fund schools, among other state services. Although no official analysis of President Obama's decision to place a moratorium on offshore production has been compiled yet, the Texas comptroller’s office said it’s unclear how much of an impact the president's decision will have on state services. Experts warn the president's decision could threaten tens of thousands of jobs in the [[Houston]] area.<ref>[http://www.kvue.com/news/state/Deepwater-drilling-moratorium-threatens-Texas-tax-revenue-95848579.html Deepwater drilling moratorium threatens Texas' tax revenue,] Gabe Gutierrez, 8 June 2010. Retrieved from kvue.com, 20 June 2010.</ref>
:'''Alabama'''
Manufacturing jobs in [[Alabama]] are at risk as a result of [[President Obama]]'s actions, as no new orders for equipment are coming in.<ref>[http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=94652 NOIA Member Cos Feel Drilling Moratorium Impacts,] National Ocean Industries Association, 11 June 2010.</ref>

=== Increased dependency on foreign oil ===

[[New Jersey]] Democrat Senator [[Robert Menendez]] proposed a ban on new offshore drilling permits and submitted a bill that would retroactively raise the financial liability of BP from $75 million to $10 billion. <ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/05/senator-menendez-on-oil-spill-no-new-drilling-permits.html Senator Menendez on Oil Spill: No New Drilling Permits, ABCNews, May 12, 2010]</ref> Oklahoma [[Republican]] Senator [[James Inhofe]] successfully killed the bill saying it would reduce competition and shut down smaller independent oil companies in favor of larger companies.

=== Too big to fail ===
An oil industry trade publication<ref>[http://oilprice.com/Environment/Oil-Spills/The-Cover-up-BP-s-Crude-Politics-and-the-Looming-Environmental-Mega-Disaster.html The Cover-up: BP's Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster,] Wayne Madsen, 06 May 2010. Retrieved from oilprice.com 6 June 2010.</ref> reports [[President Obama]] and senior White House staff, as well as Interior Secretary [[Ken Salazar]], are working with BP on [[legislation]] that would raise the cap on [[liability]] for damage claims from those affected by the oil disaster from $75 million to $10 billion. However the disaster has the real potential of costing nearly $1 trillion. Critics point out that in the deal between Obama and BP, $10 billion is a drop in the bucket for a trillion dollar disaster. Talk is noted in government circles, including [[FEMA]], of the need to nationalize BP in order to compensate those who will ultimately be affected by the worst oil disaster in the history of the world, and BP would, if its assets were nationalized, be credited with almost a trillion dollars for compensation purposes.<ref>[http://www.infowars.com/the-cover-up-bps-crude-politics-and-the-looming-environmental-mega-disaster-2/ The Cover-up: BP's Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster,] Wayne Madsen, 06 May 2010. Retrieved from infowars.com 6 June 2010.</ref><ref>[http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/31/why_obama_should_put_bp_under_temporary_receiversh/ Why Obama Should Put BP Under Temporary Receivership,] [[Obama_doublespeak#Change|Robert Reich]], 31 May 2010. Retrieved from talkingpointsmemo.com, 6 June 2010.</ref>

After Obama charged [[Attorney General]] [[Eric Holder]] to investigate the disaster, BP establish a $20 billion extrajudicial fund managed by an Obama appointee.<ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37574 Obama's Latest Shakedown,] David Limbaugh, ''Human Events'', 06/20/2010.</ref> Former [[CNN]] news writer and radio talk show host Mike Malloy suggested Holder is beholden to [[corporatist]] interests.<ref>[http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100603042451.aspx The AG vs. BP: Little Skepticism on ABC and NBC, While Lefty Talker Blasts Holder as 'Corporatist' Pretender], Rich Noyes, Media Research Center, 3 June 2010.</ref>

== Criticism of the Obama administration's handling of the disaster ==
[[File:Memorial for oil workers.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Memorial service for the 11 workers killed in the explosion. ''Reuters'' [http://www.daylife.com/photo/00nya1C9URdAy?q=Mississippi] ]]
Former top adviser to President [[Bill Clinton]], [[James Carville]], turned visibly emotional in a interview with [[George Stephanopoulos]] on [[ABC]]'s ''[[Good Morning America]]'' over [[President Barack Obama]]'s "lackadaisical" response to the Gulf oil spill disaster.
{{Cquote|The political [[stupid]]ity is unbelievable. ... The President of the United States could have come down here. He could have been involved with the families of these 11 people...... He could have implemented a plan in anticipation of this... He could be commandeering tankers and making BP bring tankers in and clean this up.... He could be deploying people to the coast. He could be with the corps of engineers and the Coast Guard with these people in Plaquemines Parish, doing something about these regulations. These people are crying. They're begging for something down here. And it just looks like he's not involved in this! Man, you have got to get down here and take control of this! Put somebody in charge of this and get this thing moving! We're about to die down here!<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/bp-oil-spill-political-headache-obama-democrats-slam/story?id=10746519 'Political Stupidity': Democrat James Carville Slams Obama's Response to BP Oil Spill; Democratic Strategist Said White House Should've Acted Quickly: 'We're About to Die Down Here',] Jake Tapper and Huma Khan, ''Good Morning America,'' 26 May 2010. Retrieved from abcnews.go.com 28 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0526/unhinged-carville-obama-gulf/ Unhinged Carville goes off on Obama on oil spill, The Raw Story, May 26, 2010]</ref><ref>http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasalert/2010/20100526121155.aspx</ref>}}
Carville also said in a separate interview on [[CNN]] with [[Anderson Cooper]],
{{Cquote|They are risking everything by this ‘go along with BP’ strategy they have. They seem, like, lackadaisical on this...they seem like they’re inconvenienced by this, this is some giant thing getting in their way and somehow or another, if you let BP handle it, it’ll all go away. It’s not going away. It’s growing out there. It is a disaster of the first magnitude...the government thinks that they are partnering with BP. I think they actually believe that BP has some kind of a good motivation here. That’s one of the, sort of, whole flaws is they're naïve.<ref>[http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1005/23/sotu.01.html State of the Union with Candy Crowley,] CNN, 23 May 2010. Retrieved 20 May 2010.</ref><ref>http://www.mediaite.com/tv/james-carville-obama-administration-seems-inconvenienced-by-bp-oil-spill/</ref>}}
Obama acknowledged the criticism days later in a televised press conference:
{{Cquote|Where I was wrong was in my belief that the oil companies had their act together when it came to worst-case scenarios.<ref>Remarks by President Obama on the Gulf Oil Spill, Office of the Press Secretary, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 29 May 2010.</ref>}}
[[File:Day12 comedyskit1.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Day 12 of the Disaster: Obama enjoys an evening of levity and banter with the Washington Press Corps at the White House Correspondent's Dinner.]]
[[MSNBC]] talk show host [[Chris Matthews]]<ref>Matthews said of Obama during the Potomac Primaries, "it's part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama's speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often." [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/13/chris-matthews-i-felt-thi_n_86449.html]</ref> said on [[Jay Leno]]'s ''Tonight Show'',
{{Cquote|The president scares me. He's been acting a little like a Vatican Observer here. When is he actually going to do something? And I worry. I know he doesn't want to take ownership of it. I know politics. He said the minute he says, 'I'm in charge,' he takes the blame.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100524/pl_ynews/ynews_pl2219 White House seeks to fend off growing chorus of critics on handling of Gulf spill,] ''Yahoo News'', 24 May 2010. Retrieved 30 May 2010.</ref>}}

[[Secretary of State]] [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]'s presidential campaign manager in 2008 questioned if [[Democratic]] primary [[voter]]s had
{{Cquote|underestimated the value of experience and crisis management as important attributes for their president.<ref>[http://topics.npr.org/article/04M3gpJa4p92Z?q=NPR Did 2008 Democratic primary voters underestimate value of experience?] Alex Pappas, ''The Daily Caller'', 06/06/10. Retrieved from npr.org, 6 June 2010.</ref>}}

Donna Brazile, who managed the presidential campaign of Democratic [[candidate]] [[Al Gore]] in 2000 said on [[ABC]]'s ''[[This Week]]'',
{{Cquote|One of the problems I have with the administration is that they're not tough enough. They are waiting for BP to say, ‘oh, we've got a new plan to stop the oil leak.’ They need to stop it, contain it, clean it up, and try to help us conserve our coastal wetlands.<ref>[http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/99375-donna-brazile-calls-obamas-oil-spill-response-not-tough-enough Donna Brazile calls Obama’s oil spill response ‘not tough enough’,] Ben Geman, ''The Hill'', 23 May 2010.</ref>}}

[[Dick Morris]], an intimate adviser to President [[Bill Clinton]] observed,
{{Cquote|these failings show that Obama is in over his head. But to the [[left]], which bleeds for each drop of water in the gulf and cries over every turtle or shrimp or sea bird, it is an unpardonable sin...Obama's incompetence and inexperience is causing [[liberal]]s to see him as arrogant, aloof, removed, conceited, suspicious of outside advice and even lazy...these character defects will haunt the president until 2012 and beyond.<ref>[http://townhall.com/columnists/DickMorrisandEileenMcGann/2010/06/19/dems_turn_on_obama?page=full&comments=true Dems Turn On Obama,] Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, 19 June 2010. Retrieved from Townhall.com 19 June 2010.</ref>}}

David Gergen worked in the [[Reagan]], [[George H.W. Bush]], and Clinton White House remarked,
{{Cquote|If our government had fought [[WWII]] like the way we’re fighting the oil spill, there’s a good chance many of us would be speaking [[German]] today.<ref>[http://www.ihatethemedia.com/david-gergen-rips-obama-oil-spill-response Another Democrat turns on Obama: David Gergen rips Obama’s oil spill response, Ihatethemedia.com, May 27, 2010]</ref>}}

[[Peggy Noonan]], a speech writer for President's Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, summed up public perceptions with,
{{Cquote|The president, in my view, continues to govern in a way that suggests he is chronically detached from the central and immediate concerns of his countrymen.... he has not, almost from the day he was inaugurated, been in sync with the [[Centrist|center]]....The American people have spent at least two years worrying that high government spending would, in the end, undo the republic. They saw the dollars gushing night and day...And now we have a videotape metaphor for all the public’s fears: the well gushing black oil into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] ...His philosophy is that it is appropriate for the federal government to occupy a more burly, significant and powerful place in America—confronting its problems of need, injustice, inequality. ... Then the oil spill came and government could not do the job, could not meet the need ...[[Hurricane Katrina|Katrina]] illustrate[d] that even though the federal government in our time has continually taken on new missions and responsibilities, the more it took on, the less it seemed capable of performing even its most essential jobs. [[Conservative]]s got this point—they know it without being told—but [[liberal]]s and [[progressive]]s did not. They thought Katrina was the result only of [[George W. Bush]]’s incompetence and conservatives’ failure to “believe in government.” But Mr. Obama was supposed to be competent....It’s not good to have a president in this position—weakened, polarizing and lacking broad public support—less than halfway through his term. That it is his fault is no comfort.<ref>[http://www.peggynoonan.com/article.php?article=524 He Was Supposed to Be Competent]: The spill is a disaster for the president and his political philosophy., Peggy Noonan, ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'', 29 May 2010.</ref>}}

''[[New York Times]]'' columnist [[Liberal_hate_speech#Against_the_disabled|Maureen Dowd]] wrote,
{{Cquote|Obama and top aides who believe in his [[divinity]] make a mistake to dismiss complaints of his aloofness as Washington white noise. He treats the press as a nuisance rather than examining his own inability to encapsulate Americans’ feelings.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/30/opinion/30dowd.html Once More, With Feeling,] Maureen Dowd, ''New York Time'' Op Ed, 29 mMay 2010.l</ref>}}

Actor Robert Redford demanded action from the [[Obama administration]]. The liberal special interest group [[Natural Resources Defense Council]] has Redford in a new ad decrying the lackluster response.<ref>[http://biggovernment.com/jmeath/2010/05/25/obamas-katrina-in-the-gulf/ Obama’s ‘Katrina’ in the Gulf, BigGovernment.com, May 25, 2010]</ref> Redford made an appearance on MSNBC and said there is no one manning this ship,
{{Cquote|In this case, we don’t need a disaster manager, we need a leader.}}

[[Hollywood values|Liberal Hollywood]] director [[James Cameron]] says;
{{cquote|Over the last few weeks I've watched, as we all have, with growing horror and heartache, watching what's happening in the Gulf and thinking those morons don't know what they're doing. <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/cameron-titanic-spill-morons/2010/06/03/id/361007 'Titanic' Director Cameron: 'Morons' Directing Spill Efforts, NewsMax, June, 2010]</ref>}}

Obnoxious Hollywood liberal [[Rosie O'Donnell]] said, "We broke the womb of freaking mother Earth." <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2010/06/08/rosie-odonnell-wants-bps-assets-seized-we-broke-freakin-womb-mother-eart Rosie O'Donnell Wants BP's Assets Seized, NewsBusters.org, June 8, 2010]</ref> In addition, O'Donnell accused BP of
{{cquote|willful homicide, willful mass murder" and demanded BP be nationalized immediately: "I say seize their assets. Right now. Seize their assets today. Take over the company.}}

===Foreign reaction===
Relations between allies the [[U.K.]] and U.S. are now at historic lows thanks to Barack Obama's mishandling of the oil spill. Britain had been repeatedly mocked by Obama prior to the spill<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/mar/06/obama-dvd-brown Obama's DVD gift to Brown - it's the thought that counts,] ''Guardian UK,'' March 6, 2009.</ref> <ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4623148/Barack-Obama-sends-bust-of-Winston-Churchill-on-its-way-back-to-Britain.html Barack Obama sends bust of Winston Churchill on its way back to Britain,] ''Telegraph UK,'' February 14, 2009.</ref> <ref>[http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/03/obama_disses_brit_pm.html Obama disses Brit PM, American Thinker,] March 5, 2009.</ref> but now find themselves subjected to endless [[propaganda]]. Prominent foreign dignitaries have expressed the public's growing frustration with the administration's posturing and hunt for scapegoats. The mayor of London, Boris Johnson, who supported Obama in 2008, decried "anti-British rhetoric, buck-passing and name-calling" while Lord Tebbit branded Mr Obama's conduct “despicable” and the president's rhetoric
{{cquote|a crude, [[bigot]]ed, [[xenophobic]] display of [[partisan]] political Presidential petulance."<ref>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1285467/BP-OIL-SPILL-Lord-Tebbit-Boris-Johnson-attack-Obamas-anti-British-rhetoric.html#ixzz0rK7zthtN</ref><ref>[http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23843524-boris-johnson-tells-barack-obama-stop-bashing-britain.do Boris Johnson tells Barack Obama: Stop bashing Britain,] London Evening Standard, June 6, 2010.</ref>}}
The atmosphere Obama created in Britain is so toxic that the British press has labelled Barack Obama the most unpopular man in England. <ref>[http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/06/17/2010-06-17_president_barack_obama_is_the_most_hated_man_in_england_says_british_reporter.html Barack Obama: the most unpopular man in Britain?,] Telegraph UK, June 17, 2010.</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|3}}

[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Disasters]]
[[Category: Environment]]

==External Links==
* [http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23oilspill Twitter Feed: #Oilspill (warning vulgar comments left)]
* [http://www.bp.com/bodycopyarticle.do?categoryId=1&contentId=7052055&nicam=USCSBaselineCrisis&nisrc=Google&nigrp=Non_Branded Official BP Global Oil Spill News Website]
* [http://dailybail.com/slideshows/bp-disaster-dying-birds/5613601 Photos of Gulf birds covered in oil]

Utilitarianism

2010-07-19T01:14:18Z

ChrisGT90: /* Critiques of utilitarianism */ Added to counterargument in last paragraph.

'''Utilitarianism''' is a political [[moral]] [[philosophy]] which calls for actions to be judged on their usefulness (or magnitude of reward) to society or select individuals.

Jeremy Bentham, one of utilitarianism's early proponents, called the process of determining the most useful possible action the hedonistic calculus. One would, according to Bentham, measure the pleasure of certain actions against the pleasure of other actions. The problems of such a calculus include the feasibility of interpersonal utility comparisons, the weighting of utility through time, and the "artificial" utility gained not from actual actions but from, for example, avoiding risk. The theoretical person which nonetheless succeeds in undertaking such a computation is said to be a [[rational actor]].

==Utilitarianism and utility==

"[[Utility]]" is defined as the good to be maximized. Different thinkers have further defined it as happiness, well-being or pleasure. The idea of utilitarianism as a moral code was first thought up by 18th century reformer and philosopher [[Jeremy Bentham]]. He believed that, "nature has put man under the governance of two sovereign masters: pleasure and pain." Thus, he concluded that good is whatever it is that brings on the greatest happiness. His belief was passed on by others after him.

==Utilitarianism in the social sciences==

Across the social sciences, utilitarianism is encountered in the form of rational choice theories. In [[economics]], it is the foundation of [[marginal analysis]]. In these academic contexts, utilitarianism serves as a tool for the analysis of social behavior. The partial exception to this lies in the field of [[welfare economics]], where some economists have tried to apply modern forms of the "hedonistic calculus" to issues of public choice.

==Critiques of utilitarianism==

Utility has been accused of supporting the idea that the ends justifies means, or that only material means count in the "hedonistic calculus." In fact, this is exactly what Bentham is arguing for.

In addition, Utilitarianism has been accused of being an unworkable system, since one cannot necessarily know the consequences of all actions.

[[Robert Nozick]] used the [[utility monster]] argument to demonstrate that the existence of something extremely efficient at turning resources into pleasure would justify large scale neglect of human needs and wants, potentially to the extent of obliging us to allow the human race to go extinct.

Nozick also used the analogy of [[The Experience Machine]] to demonstrate that people value something other than pleasure.

It has also been pointed out that Utilitarianism does not acknowledge special relationships, entitlements and agreements. For example, most people consider themselves justified in prioritising the well being of their friends and loved ones, even when more pleasure would be produced by aiding worse off strangers. People would also consider it unjust if their employer decided to give their paycheque to charity, because even though giving the paycheque to charity may service the greater good, the employee is entitled to his paycheque. An agreement like someone promising to do something for someone else could be broken for the greater good, but it is hard to see how this is justified except in extreme circumstances. The utilitarian counter-argument would be that breaking a promise or a contract generally causes unhappiness, and so it is wrong after all. A rule utilitarian would point out that while breaking a contract instead of keeping it may ''occasionally'' cause greater happiness in particular circumstances, consistently keeping contracts causes greater happiness that consistently breaking them, and thus one should follow the rule of keeping contracts.

== See also ==

*[[Hedonism]]

[[Category:Philosophical systems]]
[[Category:Economics]]

Newspeak

2010-07-19T01:06:46Z

ChrisGT90: corrected quote

'''Newspeak''' appears in [[George Orwell]]'s ''[[1984]]''. It is a [[language]] designed by the ruling regime to replace Oldspeak ([[English]]).

Its purpose is to suppress thought by severely curtailing both the conceptual vocabulary and permissible grammatical structures of Oldspeak. As Orwell describes in the Appendix: "....a thought diverging from the principles of Ingsoc should be literally unthinkable, at least insofar as thought is dependent on words." <ref>p. 312, 1984 - George Orwell, Penguin, 1984</ref>

Douglas Kellner writes:

:In 1984, "Newspeak" is the new [[totalitarian]] language which replaces "Old English." The aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought so that an individual could not even think critical or [[subversion|subversive]] thoughts. Potentially critical terms like "freedom" are formally defined into their conceptual opposites ("[[freedom]] is [[slavery]]"), or are simply eliminated from the [[dictionary]] and everyday [[language]]. In this manner, critical language would wither away as the number of words which allow differentiation and critique was increasingly reduced. <ref>http://www.uta.edu/huma/illuminations/kell13a.htm</ref>

It is a terrifying notion, not least for its plausibility and the games we see played with words and meanings by those in power today.

== See also ==
* [[Doublethink]]
* [[Thoughtcrime]]
* [[Crimestop]]
* [[Political correctness]]

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Languages]]

Newspeak

2010-07-19T01:06:03Z

ChrisGT90: Quote

'''Newspeak''' appears in [[George Orwell]]'s ''[[1984]]''. It is a [[language]] designed by the ruling regime to replace Oldspeak ([[English]]).

Its purpose is to suppress thought by severely curtailing both the conceptual vocabulary and permissible grammatical structures of Oldspeak. As Orwell describes in the Appendix: "....a thought diverging from the principles of Ingsoc should be literally unthinkable, at least insofar as thought is dependent on words." <ref>p. 312, 1984 - George Orwell, Penguin, 1984</ref>

Douglas Kellner writes:

:In 1984, "Newspeak" is the new [[totalitarian]] language which replaces "Oldspeak" (English as we know it). The aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought so that an individual could not even think critical or [[subversion|subversive]] thoughts. Potentially critical terms like "freedom" are formally defined into their conceptual opposites ("[[freedom]] is [[slavery]]"), or are simply eliminated from the [[dictionary]] and everyday [[language]]. In this manner, critical language would wither away as the number of words which allow differentiation and critique was increasingly reduced. <ref>http://www.uta.edu/huma/illuminations/kell13a.htm</ref>

It is a terrifying notion, not least for its plausibility and the games we see played with words and meanings by those in power today.

== See also ==
* [[Doublethink]]
* [[Thoughtcrime]]
* [[Crimestop]]
* [[Political correctness]]

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Languages]]

Doublethink

2010-07-19T01:05:17Z

ChrisGT90: Moving quote about Newspeak to the Newspeak article

'''Doublethink''' in [[George Orwell]]'s [[dystopia|dystopian]] novel ''[[1984]]'' is the practice of keeping two contradictory thoughts in one's own mind.

In [[formal logic]], it is considered disproof of a [[premise]], if it implies two contradictory [[statement]]s. So in Orwell's nightmare political vision, citizens participate actively in their own [[indoctrination]], willingly accepting false government [[propaganda]]. Indeed, the main character of ''1984'' is a man whose job is to falsify historical documents in the government archives.

==See Also==
*[[cognitive dissonance]]
*[[double standard]]
*[[hypocrisy]]
*[[intellectual dishonesty]]

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Logic]]

Newspeak

2010-07-19T01:03:44Z

ChrisGT90: Grammar

Obamaspeak

2010-07-19T01:03:03Z

ChrisGT90:

'''Obamaspeak''' is meaningless content from [[Barack Obama]] or his campaign, often designed merely to appease a [[liberal]] interest group, take a position that is perceived to be popular, or satisfy a reporter's inquiry.

Bloggers commented on the Obamaspeak during his campaign for president.<ref>http://jay1949.wordpress.com/2008/08/04/decoding-obamaspeak/</ref><ref>http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2009/03/19/obama-speak-homeland-security-secretary-replaces-terrorism-term-man-caus</ref>

An example of Obamaspeak after the presidential election was when Obama first publicly opposed the [[Roland Burris]] nomination to the [[U.S. Senate]], but within a week reversed himself (without admitting his error) as the perceived popular opinion shifted to the other side.

Obamaspeak can be compared with the fictional [[Newspeak]], which was a predicted variation of English that likewise attempted to [[dumb down]] the population in a senseless but efficient manner.<ref>Orwell, George, [[1984]].</ref>

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Liberalism]]

Liberal myths

2010-07-19T00:49:13Z

ChrisGT90: You can't contest whether or not a fetus is human; Democrats try to say that it isn't a person and isn't protected by the constitution. A small, but crucial, difference.

== Liberal myths are heavily promoted falsehoods motivated by a destructive belief system ==

Liberal beliefs:<ref>http://www.twilightslastgleaming.com/myths.htm</ref> They include:

*The claim that the population has increased by a large amount, and human beings are beginning to overpopulate. (This myth is used as an attempt to justify abortion and anthropogenic global warming)
*The claim that people today are more knowledgeable than in prior centuries.
*The claim that the [[George W. Bush|Bush]] tax cuts substantially reduced 2006 revenues and expanded the [[budget]] deficit.
*The claim that the Bush tax cuts have not helped the economy.
*Anthropogenic [[Global Warming]]. <ref>[http://www.nowpublic.com/some-exasperating-liberal-myths Some Exasperating Liberal Myths] NowPublic.com, August 27, 2007</ref>
*The claim that a [[fetus]] is not a living person.
*The claim the [[embryonic stem cell]]s will provide many cures. Unlike adult stem cells, embryonic cells have provided no known cures.
*The claim that [[gun control]] reduces crime.
*The claim that [[abortion]] and [[breast cancer]] are unrelated.
*The claim that [[abortion]] and mental depression are unrelated.
*The claim that [[gambling]] financially benefits state school systems <REF>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/17/cbsnews_investigates/main3269456.shtml Is The Lottery Shortchanging Schools?] CBS News, September 17, 2007</ref>
*The claim to support the rights of women, never mention the oppressed women in Muslim countries. <ref>[http://www.aclu.org/womensrights/index.html About the Women's Rights Project] ACLU</ref>
*The claim that the [[media]] is not biased toward the liberal agenda.
*The claim that enabling [[oil]] drilling will not reduce long-term [[energy]] prices. <ref>[http://rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/07/nancy_pelosis_energy_policy.php?comments=show Nancy Pelosi's Energy Policy] Rightwingnews.com, July 8, 2008</ref>
*The claim that enabling oil drilling will not provide [[energy]] security.<ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=33767 Oil Money May Buy Drilling Vote, Liberal Says] CNSNews.com, August 7, 2008</ref>
*The claim that same-sex couple adoptions can replace the [[love]] from a mother and a father. <ref>[http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/families/a/adoption_2.htm Lesbian and Gay Adoption Rights] About.com</ref>
*The claim that an individuals [[sexual]] preference needs to be a protected civil right. <ref>[http://www.civilrights.org/research_center/civilrights101/sexualorientation.html GAYS AND LESBIANS] Civilrights.com</ref>
*That there is a [[vast right-wing conspiracy]] <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,359741,00.html THE VAST LEFT-WING CONSPIRACY] Fox News, May 29, 2008</ref>
*The claim that opposing the [[homosexual agenda]] is [[bigotry]]. <ref>[http://www.boycottmcdonalds.com/detail.aspx?id=102 Boycott McDonald's!] American Family Association</ref>
*The claim that the US acted unilaterally in Iraq (The USA and Britain led a 30-nation coalition in Iraq)<ref>[http://www.heritage.org/Research/Europe/wm558.cfm The Myth of U.S. Isolation] The Heritage Foundation, September 7, 2004 </ref>
*The claim that [[President Bush]] stole the 2000 elections. <ref>[http://archive.democrats.com/display.cfm?id=239 Floridagate] Democrats.com</ref>
*The claim that [[President Bush]] lied about WMD in [[Iraq]] to grab [[oil]].
*The claim that [[Saddam Hussein]] was not seeking to buy yellowcake Uranium. <ref>[http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/14/tenet-niger/ Tenet Agrees To Cooperate With Congressional Investigation Into Niger Fraud] ThinkProgress, May 14, 2007</ref>
*The claim that the [[9/11]] terrorists attacks were an inside job by the [[USA]].
*The claim that Foreign Intelligence & Surveillance Act (FISA) is for spying on Americans. <ref>[http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/35928prs20080709.html Senate Passes Unconstitutional Spying Bill] ACLU, July 9, 2008</ref>
*The claim that [[big government]] will benefit its' citizens. <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/politics/candidates_public_service/2008/09/11/130009.html McCain, Obama Discuss Views on Public Service] Ap, September 11, 2008</ref>
*The claim that [[military]] recruits are poor and uneducated. <ref>[http://www.heritage.org/research/nationalsecurity/cda05-08.cfm Who Bears the Burden? Demographic Characteristics of U.S. Military Recruits] Heritage Foundation, November 7, 2005</ref> <ref>[http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_200612/ai_n17197505 Rangel Is Wrong About Recruits] Human Events, December 4,2006</ref> <ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/31/kerry.mccain/ Bush on Kerry remark: U.S. troops are 'plenty smart'] CNN, November 1, 2006</ref>
*The claim that [[government]] run [[healthcare]] is better than a capitalist healthcare system. <ref>[http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr009=j7lglh8nq9.app5b&page=NewsArticle&id=9238&news_iv_ctrl=1283 Free, universal health care must be a right!] VotePSL.org, may 30, 2008</ref>
*They claim that going on the offense against [[terrorists]] creates more terrorists. <ref>[http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/03/madeleine-albright-we-created-more.html Madeleine Albright: "We Created More Terrorists... Our Soldiers Are the Problem"] Gateway Pundit, March 27, 2008</ref>
*They claim that terrorism should be handled by [[law]] enforcement. <ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/29/AR2008072902041.html Strategy Against Al-Qaeda Faulted] Washington Post, July 30, 2008</ref> <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,406901,00.html Bush: War on Terror is Not Law Enforcement Matter] AP, August 20, 2008</ref>
*They claim that the USA should negotiate with rogue [[nations]] and terror groups.
*They claim that [[socialism]] is a better than [[capitalism]].
*They claim that there is a [[gene]] which causes people to be gay, despite the fact that the scientific community rejects this view
*They claim that [[humans]] and [[ape]]s have a common ancestor
*They claim that the [[death penalty]] does not deter [[crime]], despite the overwhelming evidence showing that the death penalty does deter crime
*They claim that [[atheists]] are just as moral as [[Christians]] who regularly go to a church, or, in some cases, claim atheists are morally superior.
*They claim that all [[religions]] teach the same thing.
*They claim that [[intelligent design]] is not a science and has no evidence.
*They claim that no [[climatologist]] or [[physicist]] rejects global warming, despite the fact that the founder of The Weather Channel rejects global warming, as do thousands of other scientists.
*They claim Hitler was a [[Catholic]].
*They claim opposition to [[Obama]] is racism.
*They claim the general welfare clause in the Constitution gives government the right to force you to buy government-run healthcare.
*They claim Jesus was the first [[socialist]].
*They claim [[affirmative action]] works.
*They claim the [[Old Testament]] is immoral.
*They claim that the [[Jews]] aren't the Jews of the Bible.
*They claim that [[feminism]] has no bias.
*They claim [[homosexuals]] do not try to convert [[heterosexuals]].
*They claim that [[gay marriage]] will not result in [[polygamy]] also being written into law.
*They claim that the [[Bible]] is fictional.
*They claim that [[Liberal Christianity]] is compatible with the teachings of [[Jesus Christ]].
*They claim that proper tire inflation can replace the need for additional oil drilling.
*That we should eat less red meat in order to combat [[climate change]].<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,418801,00.html</ref>
*They claim Jesus was a liberal, or that Jesus was left-wing<ref>[http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bernstein/works/1895/cromwell/09-communism.htm The 'Diggers' movement is held up as an example of good Christianity]</ref>.
*The claim that the [[Nation of Islam]] is unrelated to Islam the religion.
*The claim that portable school vouchers would destroy [[public schools]], yet send their own children to private schools.
*The claim that if you are [[pro-life]], you don't care about people after they're born. <ref>[http://twitter.com/movingleft Obnoxious supporter of Obama Twitter Account @MovingLeft (Warning:Vulgar)]</ref>
*The claim that more black people died in wars of [[America]] than in [[abortion]]. 1,786 blacks are killed '''daily''' by abortion, one of two [[pregnant]] women will be suckered into pro-choice genocide. [http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/1685410938.html]
*The claim that renaming [[War on Terror]] to Overseas Contingency Operation will reduce the threats facing America.
*The claim to cutback our country's missile defenses will some how make us more secure than we were.
*The claim that the nation will go bankrupt if we don't spend more tax dollars.
*We as a nation must switch to unproven technologies for the environments sake, such as wind or solar power. Yet, proven clean energy generated by nuclear power is not an option.
*The claim that you are not pro-life if you are [[pro-gun]].
*The claim that guns are responsible for deaths. (by that same logic, pencils are responsible for misspelled words.)
*The claim that 47 million Americans don't have health insurance. (Actual number is between 10 and 15 million) <ref>[[Essay:47 million Americans without health insurance lie‎]]</ref>
*They claim that homosexuality cannot be overcome by therapy and prayer

==Patriotism==
The liberal belief that an individual can claim to support our military, just not the mission and still be considered a 'Patriot'. In fact, the exact opposite is the truth. A liberals patriotism, party-specific position, cannot support the troops if they are an a impediment to their political left-wing strategy. The main reason for this has to due with passionate, partisan hatred for our current commander n chief, the [[President of the United States of America]]. Liberals claim to support the military, claim not to support the mission and refuse to support the Commander. The extremist left discounts the counter effect of troop morale. Understanding the true liberal mindset when it comes to supporting our U.S. troops, observe the often tried protest march. Though frustration boils over, actions lead from protest to outright sabotage or anarchism. <ref>[http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/01/anti-war-protest-at-gop-convention-turns-violent/ Anti-War Protest at GOP Convention Turns Violent] Fox News, September 1, 2008</ref> Liberal credibility fails and lack of concern for the support of America shows. The left-wing cares so much for our military they condone and actually prop up politicians that abuse troops with reckless accusations <ref>[http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0907/Federal_judge_order_Murtha_to_testify_in_Haditha_defamation_case.html Federal judge orders Murtha to testify in Haditha defamation case] Politico, September 28, 2007</ref>, negative media coverage and ego trips <ref>[http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blpic-kerrystuckiniraq.htm Political Humor] About.com</ref>. Liberal protesters look the other way as war memorials are vandalized. Liberals protest our severely injured soldiers at the Walter Reed Medical Center.<ref>[http://www.crosswalk.com/1347570/ Anti-War Protests Target Wounded at Army Hospital] Crosswalk.com</ref> Liberal protesters harass, damage or block military recruitment centers from operating business as-usual. <ref>[http://mfvov.com/blog/?p=505 Recruiting Center Attacks Coast to Coast] Military Families Voice of Victory, March 19, 2008</ref> This leftwing position, the myth is successful in feeding media driven discontent and mediocrity shame. If the news is bad, a liberal is spoon fed. If the news is good, the spoon fed liberal is oblivious. e.g. "a complete suspension of disbelief".

Patriotism, to your brother, who volunteers and risks the ultimate sacrifice out of love, will never be diminished. True patriots will always be in our gratitude and held in the highest light.

==America Perceived==
The myth liberals give says we need to restore America's image in the world. Again, this mostly has to do with liberals' negative view of [[President Bush]]. Liberals want the two linked even though the myth is false. They blame Bush and Iraq for the bad USA image but the truth is that the credibility of the American left is a worse image than America's image abroad. The main need for liberals to propagate this myth is the fact that [[socialist]] governments of Europe oppose the policy of [[Iraq]]. This further fuels liberals' political agenda to remove [[Republicans]] from power. Liberals love Europeans and cite their false socialist utopia at every chance. European opposition automatically reinforces their belief that America's image is damaged. As of 2008, most of the [[European]] leaders that opposed Iraq are no longer in positions of power. The result, European [[conservatives]] were elected who publicly aligned themselves with America.

Those [[liberals]] that use the myth and regularly bash the USA are often called the "Blame America First" crowd. Though they never seem to mention that America gives more in donations, in total dollars, than any other country on Earth. <ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-06-25-charitable_N.htm Americans give record $295B to charity] USA Today, 6/25/2007</ref> A sure way to change America's image in the world is to show the world we respect life. The repeal of Roe Vs. Wade would be a start.

Reasons why [[America]] was hated prior to 2003 include wealth, women's rights, support for our democratic ally [[Israel]], democratic government, capitalist economy and exporting immorality.

==Bad Successful Companies==
In the attempt to point fingers and lay blame, the liberals produce the myth that profits made by successful companies are bad for America. Only a select group of companies are targeted for public shame. This is a false myth because successful corporations actually create jobs and [[tax]] revenue. Retirement funds and municipal bonds rely heavily on the profits from these companies. Also, the reason these companies flourish is because the capitalist system rewards their hard work. The liberals will try to create sympathy, that they care for the average American, they are the ones going after wrongdoers to make it right.

[[Liberals]] have demonized such companies as RJ Reynolds, Walmart, Halliburton and Blackwater. Their latest target is Exxon Mobil for their enormous profits and futures market oil speculators. Most of their accusations are absurd. Liberals in [[Congress]] don't blink an eye when it comes time to spend all that tax revenue generated. Liberals in Congress have been called on their [[hypocrisy]] for owning stocks in those companies. Which in turn, they divest their portfolios like nothing was ever wrong. For years, for decades, these companies have lobbied members of Congress, they have worked together for their common goals. In return, hefty [[campaign]] donations are their reward. Then for opportune reasons, liberals will publicly ridicule and verbally attack these bad, greedy capitalists. Corporate heads are brought before congress for a sideshow grilling to explain their actions. <ref>[http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/01/MNU7VU217.DTL Congress asks Big Oil to justify big profits] The SF Chronicle, April 2, 2008</ref> The Windfall Tax is just another example of the sham created by this liberal myth. Those companies make enough money, they should now be forced to give some back. They are threatened with nationalization <ref>[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=65111 Congresswoman threatens to nationalize oil industry] Worldnetdaily.com, May 23, 2008</ref>
and further government regulation, a socialist scheme. As the price of gas fell, Congress just pretended like nothing ever happened, Big Oil off the hook.

==The Economy From The Previous 8 Years==
In an attempt to spread Bush hatred without mentioning his name, it is common for liberals to lie and say ''"we're in this economic mess because of the policies over the previous eight years."'' This is a myth, perpetuated by the corrupt in order to link bad economics with [[Conservatism]] and Bush policy. These liberals are the very same individuals that would not recognize George W. Bush's economic successes when the economy was creating jobs. Bush, [[McCain]], [[Alan Greenspan]] are all on record as trying to fix the corrupt lending policies and government mismanagement for the past eight years. <ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&NR=1 Financial Meltdown Video]YouTube</ref> All the while Democrats were lining their pockets with [[Fannie Mae]] and [[Freddie Mac]] donations. Democrats are overwhelmingly responsible if they should point fingers. Democrats [[Barney Frank]], [[Chris Dodd]], [[John Kerry]], [[Charles Schumer]] and even [[Barack Obama]] are as much, if not directly, indirectly responsible for the failed economics of this country over the past eight-years. The same people who got us into this mess are now responsible for getting us out of financial meltdown. Blame can go all around on this one, both Republicans and Democrats. This was the result of many bad decisions over a long period of time. Then out of nowhere, financial calamity that nobody saw coming, except congressmen and women who were privy to bank collapses. They made good money while the rest of America suffered. <ref>[http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2009/06/members_of_us_house_financial.html Members of U.S. House Financial Services Committee snapped up or dumped bank stocks as bottom fell out of market Cleveland.com June 25, 2009]</ref>

{{cquote|The truth of the matter; Bush-era 4.5% unemployment, Obama-era will it go higher than 10%?}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}
{{Liberalism}}

[[Category:Deceit]]
[[Category:liberals]]

Gulf of Mexico oil spill

2010-07-19T00:39:11Z

ChrisGT90: Although still misleading, I think this reads a little better (with no loss of meaning).

[[File:Dispersants spraying.jpg|right|300px|thumb|President Obama directed the [[United States Coast Guard]] to dump [[toxic]] disperants into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] despite known health hazards to humans and wildlife. [http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/] ]]The '''Gulf of Mexico oil spill''' began on 20 April 2010 when the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil drilling rig operated by [[BP]] (known as British Petroleum until 2000) exploded and sank.<ref>[http://www.businessinsider.com/gulf-of-mexico-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-2010-4 Here's The Questions You Should Be Asking About The Gulf Of Mexico Oil Spill]</ref> Oil began leaking at a rate later estimated at 2.5 million gallons per day, resulting in massive environmental degradation.<ref>[http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hSaoIddZwUtk-BTcIDuy6AjaHwSgD9GBV0GO0 Scientists: Oil leaking up to 2.52M gallons daily]</ref> The blowout also killed eleven workers. Despite the known [[toxic]]ity of the dispersant Corexit, the [[Obama administration]] dumped millions of gallons of the hazardous chemical into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] with C-130 aircraft provided by the [[U.S. Coast Guard]]<ref>http://vodpod.com/watch/3962219-confirmed-corexit-being-sprayed-from-coast-guard-planes</ref>and the [[Air Force]].<ref>http://bpoilslick.blogspot.com/2010/07/us-air-force-sprays-corexit-from-plane.html</ref>

On 31 March 2010 [[President Obama]] announced a plan for exploitation of offshore oil reserves during a speech at Andrews Air Force Base outside [[Washington, D.C.]]<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/user/AssociatedPress#p/u/6/mA7RAfHN-wo Obama Lifts Ban on Offshore Drilling,] ''[[Associated Press]],'' 31 March 2010. Retrieved from [[Youtube]] 9 May 2010.</ref> The President's actions have been labeled, "a decision to endanger our coastal [[ecosystem]]s with the risk of catastrophic oil spills."<ref>[http://members.greenpeace.org/blog/greenpeaceusa_blog/2010/04/30/president_obama_committed_to_endangering President Obama must reinstate moratorium on offshore drilling,] [[Greenpeace]] USA blogs, 30 Apr 2010.</ref> Defending the decision, the President remarked "oil rigs today generally don’t cause spills. They are technologically very advanced."<ref>White House Press Release, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-a-discussion-jobs-and-economy-charlotte-north-carolina Remarks by the President in a Discussion on Jobs and the Economy in Charlotte, North Carolina,] Office of the Press Secretary, April 02, 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 3 May 2010.</ref><ref>Video: [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/04/29/flashback_obama_says_oil_rigs_today_dont_generally_cause_spills.html Obama Says "Oil Rigs Today Don't Generally Cause Spills"], 2 April 2010. Retrieved from RealClearPolitics.com 12 May 2010.</ref>

Since January 2009 the [[Obama administration]] approved 346 oil drilling plans without securing permits required by law from the [[federal]] agency that assesses environmental impacts. One such approval was for the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig responsible for the loss of life and spill.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?partner=rss&emc=rss U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits,] Ian Urbina, ''New York Times'', 13 May 2010. Retrieved 28 May 2010.</ref> [[President Barack Obama]] has been widely criticized for an unprepared and bungled response, most notably from former supporters.
 
{{cquote|'''''<big>We're in charge, but BP is responsible.</big>''''' -- '''Barack Obama, news conference of 5/27/2010'''<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/27/obama-federal-government-charge-oil-spill-response/ Obama news conference, 5/27/10]</ref>}}

==The Obama plan ==
[[File:OCS Eastern Gulf of Mexico Strategy.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Map of expanded areas of offshore oil drilling authorized by President Obama on 31 March 2010.<ref>[http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/2010/04/01/obama-offshore-oil-drilling-details.htm Obama Offshore Oil Drilling Details,] 1 April 2010. Retrieved from About.com Guide to US Government Info 16 May 2010.</ref> ''Source: United States Department of Interior.'']]
Obama called for expanded development and production throughout the [[Gulf of Mexico]]. The [[Department of Interior]]'s [[Minerals Management Service]] (MMS) estimates that the Gulf of Mexico contains 36-41.5 billion barrels of oil and 161-207 trillion cubic feet of natural gas resources. According a DOI press release, Obama's plan would "expand oil and gas development and exploration" while "protecting fisheries, [[tourism]], and places off U.S. coasts that are not appropriate for development."<ref>[http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/2010_03_31_release.cfm Department of Interior Press Release,] 31 March 2010.</ref>

The ''[[Associated Press]]'' has reported on the role ex-government regulators play in [[lobby]]ing and influence; the chief of staff of the MSS's Gulf of Mexico region once stated that deep water drilling had "few or no regulations or standards."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/a-2649320~INFLUENCE_GAME__Govt_regulators_hired_by_companies.html INFLUENCE GAME: Govt regulators hired by companies,] Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010. Retrieved from examiner.com 26 May 2010.</ref> Two years later the senior official left his job in the MMS to work for BP.<ref>Ibid.</ref> During President Obama's first year in office, as BP's regulatory compliance and environmental manager, the ex-MMS official lobbied the U.S. Ocean Policy Task Force to "carefully weigh policies that may establish exclusionary zones" or "disrupt the MMS leasing program," according to a statement posted at whitehouse.gov.<ref>Influence Game, Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010.</ref> He further stated that BP wanted access to off-limit areas such as the eastern [[Gulf of Mexico]]<ref>Ibid.</ref> which President Obama approved in March 2010.

Total U.S. offshore [[crude oil]] production in 2009 was 1.7 million barrels a day, of which 1.6 million barrels a day came from the U.S. section of the Gulf of Mexico.<ref>[http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/info_glance/petroleum.html Energy Information Administration.]</ref>

According to the ''New York Times'', President Obama "said several times during his [[Barack Hussein Obama 2008 Presidential campaign|presidential campaign]] that he supported expanded offshore drilling. He noted in his [[State of the Union]] address<ref>[http://www.c-span.org/Executive/State-of-the-Union.aspx Barack Obama State of the Union Address 2010]. Retrieved from [[C-SPAN]].org 15 May 2010.</ref> in January [2010] that weaning the country from imported oil would require “tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development.”<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/science/earth/31energy.html Obama to Open Offshore Areas to Oil Drilling for First Time,] John M. Broder, ''[[New York Times]]'', March 30, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/03/obama_clears_way_for_oil_drill.html Obama clears way for oil drilling off U.S. coasts], Associated Press, March 31, 2010, Retrieved from nola.com 8 May 2010.</ref>

Nobel Laureate in Economics, Dr. [[Paul Krugman]],<ref>[http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2008/ Economics 2008.] Retrieved from Nobel.org 10 May 2010.</ref> who has been highly critical of Obama [[Obama administration corporate bailouts|economic policy]]<ref>[http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090331151429.aspx Krugman Garners Newsweek Cover for Left-Wing Criticism of [[Obamunism|Obamanomics,]] ] Julia A. Seymour, ''Business & Media Institute'', 3/31/09.</ref> in his regular ''New York Times'' column, ''Conscience of a Liberal'' wrote a piece entitled "The oil spill is Obama's fault," and stated "that’s not what I believe....The only question is what the story will be."<ref>[http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/the-oil-spill-is-obamas-fault/?src=twt&twt=NytimesKrugman The Oil Spill Is Obama’s Fault,] Paul Krugman, ''New York Times '' Op-Ed, 30 April 2010.</ref> When questioned about the Obama regulators "cozy relationship" with oil companies the president responded, "absolutely I take responsibility for that."<ref>[http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-gulf-oil-spill Remarks by President Obama on the Gulf Oil Spill,] Office of the Press Secretary, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 29 May 2010.</ref>
=== Obama administration asks Court to allow BP drilling in the Gulf of Mexico ===

Less than four months after [[President Barack Obama]] took office a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. found that the U.S. Government was unprepared for a major spill at sea, relying on an "irrational" environmental analysis of the risks of offshore drilling. The Obama administration urged the court to revisit the decision. In its arguments to the court, the Obama administration said that the loss of royalties on the oil, estimated at almost $10 billion, "may have significant financial consequences for the federal government."

Among the existing leases was the Lease Sale #206. That deal included BP's acquisition, for $34 million, of the acreage encompassing the Deep Water Horizons well.

A day after the administration's petition, the industry's main lobbying group, the American Petroleum Institute, made its own case echoing the government's arguments. "The significance of [Gulf of Mexico] activities under the five-year program cannot be overstated," the API argued.

Secretary [[Ken Salazar]] expressed confidence that problems within the [[Minerals Management Service]] that led to poor oversight of offshore drilling were resolved. In September 2009, in testimony before the House Natural Resources Committee, Salazar listed steps he had taken to make sure problems "don't occur in the future."

In [[Senate]] hearings held in mid-November 2009, Obama MMS Deputy Director Walter Cruickshank assured the Committee panel fears of containing a catastrophic blowout were misplaced, saying the U.S. had "what we believe is the most aggressive oil spill contingency planning...in the world."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704699604575342843359124882.html</ref>

=== Approval of BP's response plan ===
The [[Obama administration]] accepted and approved BP's regional oil spill response plan for the [[Gulf of Mexico]] dated 30 June 2009<ref>[http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1351 Did anyone actually read BP's oil spill response plan?] Walruses and Seals, Non-Existent Equipment Lists and Other Fanciful References, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from peer.org 19 June 2010.</ref> and covered all the company’s operations in the Gulf. The plan lists
:*“Sea Lions, Seals, Sea Otters [and] [[Walrus]]es” as “Sensitive Biological Resources” in the Gulf, suggesting that portions were cribbed from previous [[Arctic]] exploratory planning;
:* Gives a web site for a [[Japan]]ese home shopping site as the link to one of its “primary equipment providers for BP in the Gulf of Mexico Region [for] rapid deployment of spill response resources on a 24 hour, 7 days a week basis;” and
:* Directs its media spokespeople to never make “promises that [[property]], [[ecology]], or anything else will be restored to normal.”<ref>http://www.mms.gov/DeepwaterHorizon/BP_Regional_OSRP_Redactedv2.pdf</ref>

The government approved plan made no mention about tracking sub-surface oil plumes from deepwater blowouts or preventing [[disease]] ([[virus]]es, [[bacteria]], etc.) transmission to captured [[animal]]s in rehabilitation facilities.

=== British Petroleum ===
During the first 100 days of the [[Obama administration]], the Minerals Management Service ([[MMS]]) of the [[Department of the Interior]] granted a “categorical exclusion” from a detailed environmental impact statement required under [[law]]<ref>[http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/nepa/nepaeqia.htm The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.]</ref> to BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling operation, according to the ''[[Washington Post]].''<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html U.S. exempted BP's Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study,] Juliet Eilperin, ''Washington Post,'' 5 May 2010.</ref> BP's exploration plan received in the Administration's MMS field office on 23 March 2009 states "no mitigation measures other than those required by regulation and BP policy will be employed to avoid, diminish or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources." It declared any spill would have only "sub-lethal" effects on fish and marine [[mammal]]s but it was "unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities."<ref>http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/initial_exploration_plan050410.pdf</ref>

As Senator, and while running for president, [[Barack Obama]] received a total of $77,051 from BP<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/BP?view=detail&siteid=nwhwk</ref> and has taken more money from BP's [[Political Action Committee]] and individuals connected with BP over the past 20 years than any other candidate, according to [[FEC]] disclosure records.<ref>[http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0505/obama-biggest-recipient-bp-political-action-money-20-years Obama is biggest recipient of BP’s political action cash in the last 20 years,] John Byrne, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from rawstory.com 9 May 2010.</ref> Likewise, the independent watchdog Center for Responsive Politics noted, "the “top recipient of BP-related donations during the 2008 cycle was President Barack Obama himself.”<ref>Jake Tapper, Political Punch, [[ABC News]], 5 May 2010. [http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/white-house-idea-that-bp-given-special-exemption-because-of-campaign-cash-to-obama-silly-and-ridiculous.html?cid=6a00d8341c4df253ef0134807669a3970c]</ref><ref>http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/04/on-thursday-oil-giant-bp.html</ref>
[[File:Bp-obama-logo.jpg|right|225px|thumb|Obama approved drilling permits for BP without the statutory requirement to file an environmental impact assessment,<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?partner=rss&emc=rss U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits,] Ian Urbina, ''New York Times'', 13 May 2010.</ref> the handling of spills in a worst-case scenario,<ref>[http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2010/bp-exempted-05-05-2010.html Interior Department Exempted BP Drilling From Environmental Review]: In Rush to Expand Offshore Oil Drilling, Interior Secretary Salazar Abandoned Pledge to Reform
Industry-dominated Mineral Management Service. Press Release, Center for Biological Diversity, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from www.biologicaldiversity.org, 30 May 2010.</ref> and fostered a cozy relationship between government and the oil industry.<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=10745153 Govt Regulators Hired by Companies, Influence Game: Drilling regulators move from government to industry through revolving door,] Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010. Retrieved from abcnews.go.com 30 May 2010.</ref> No other candidate took more money from BP in the past two decades than Obama received in only six years.<ref>[http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html Obama biggest recipient of BP cash,] Erika Lovley, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from Politico.com 30 May 2010.</ref>]]
Talk show personality Ed Schultz of [[MSNBC]] reiterated a call for campaign finance reform as a result of Barack Obama's ties to BP and the government's response.<ref>[http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100602102656.aspx MSNBC's Schultz Draws Bizarre Connection Between Oil Spill and Campaign Finance Reform.] Alex Fitzsimmons, Media Research Center, 2 June 2010.</ref>

Transocean, owner of the Deepwater Horizons drilling rig leased to BP, was the recipient of the Obama [[Mineral Management Service]]'s, ''Safety Award for Excellence''.<ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=66303 Democratic Leader Hoyer Doesn’t Know Whether Obama Administration was Prepared for Oil Spill,] Matt Cover, CNSNews.com, May 20, 2010.</ref><ref>MMS Thought Deepwater Horizon was Award-Winningly SAFE, The Project on Government Oversight, Exposing Government Corruption, 29 April 2010.</ref> On 30 April 2010 Transocean's stock fell after [[President Obama]]’s chief strategist, [[David Axelrod]], made comments nine days into the disaster and the [[government]] raised estimates to more than fives times of what had previously been reported about how much oil was leaking into the [[Gulf of Mexico]].<ref>[http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-30/transocean-drops-after-axelrod-comments-on-drilling-update2-.html Transocean Drops After Axelrod Comments on Drilling,] Edward Klump, ''Bloomberg Business Week'', 30 April 2010. Retrieved 2 June 2010.</ref>

It has been reported in the [[finance|financial]] press that among owners of BP<ref>[http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-aims-at-bp-hits-state-pensions-2010-06-09 President Obama's ramped up rhetoric over the BP oil spill is beginning to have an effect,] ''MarketWatch, 9 June 2010.</ref> are
*New Jersey Division of Investment (51 million shares)
*California Public Employees Retirement System (36 million shares)
*Pennsylvania Public School Employees Retirement System (7.1 million shares)
*Teachers Retirement System of Alabama (4.5 million shares)
*Employees Retirement System of Texas (4.1 million shares)
*Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (1.1 million shares)
*Illinois State Board of Investment (1.1 million shares)<ref>In 1990 Barack Obama took a job with the Law Firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland ([http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/06/nation/na-obamalegal6 Obama's lawyer days: brief and not all civil rights,] Dan Morain, ''Los Angeles Times'' 2008-04-06). Allison S. Davis, a senior partner in the firm, went into business with [[Chicago]] slumlord [[Tony Rezko]]. Davis was appointed to the Illinois State Board of Investment by Governor [[Rod Blagojevich]] at Rezko's request in 2003. ([http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/644511 How reform-minded City Hall critic became a cozy insider,] Tim Novak, ''Chicago Sun-Times'', 2007-11-11).</ref>
*Indiana Public Employees' Retirement Fund (0.7 million shares)
*Washington State Investment Board (1.2 million shares)
*United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund (21.9 million shares).

BP was found [[Negligence|wilfully negligent]] during the [[Bush administration]] in a [[Texas]] refinery explosion incident, and was assessed $108 million in fines - the highest workplace safety fines in U.S. history.<ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/16/60minutes/main6490197_page5.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody Blowout: The Deepwater Horizon Disaster,] ''[[60 Minutes]]'', 16 May 2010. Retrieved from cbsnews.com, 2 June 2010.</ref>

=== Nalco and Corexit ===
[[File:Dermatitis4.jpg|right|375px|thumb|Dermatitis is one immediate health concern<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/28/bp-gulf-oil-spill-pollution Gulf oil spill is public health risk, environmental scientists warn,] Suzanne Goldenberg, ''[[Guardian (uk)]]'', 28 May 2010.</ref> of the [[Obama administration]]'s decision to use [[toxic]] substances to disperse the visibility of the spill.
[http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CB4QFjAD&url=http://www.chemie.uni-regensburg.de/Physikalische_Chemie/Kunz/student/Uebung_Formulierung/Clark_presentation.pdf&rct=j&q=photo+dermatitis+corexit&ei=qn0ITPGEM-qXlAfeo8TSAQ&usg=AFQjCNHp_FTjbxFEzZI4o9iMcapG_kFO3Q&sig2=zxmIoVnIi2vekrq3WB6ztA]Residents, cleanup workers, and tourists alike may be affected. [http://chealth.canoe.ca/channel_health_news_details.asp?news_id=31005&news_channel_id=145&channel_id=145] ]]
Nalco of Naperville, Illinois formed a joint venture with Exxon Chemical in 1994 and the company's current leadership includes several executives from BP. Nalco reported it sold in excess of $40 million to BP of its dispersant, Corexit, shortly after the [[Gulf of Mexico]] oil spill disaster.

Of 18 dispersants approved by the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA), 12 were found to be more effective on southern [[Louisiana]] crude than Corexit, EPA data show.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/business/energy-environment/13greenwire-less-toxic-dispersants-lose-out-in-bp-oil-spil-81183.html Less Toxic Dispersants Lose Out in BP Oil Spill Cleanup,]
Paul Quinlan, ''Greenwire'', May 13, 2010. Retrieved from nytimes.com 25 May 2010.</ref> Two of the 12 were found to be 100 percent effective on [[Gulf of Mexico]] crude, whereas two Corexit products rated only 56 percent and 63 percent effective.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The [[toxic]]ity of the other 12 was shown to be in some cases 10 or 20 times less than Corexit, according to the EPA.<ref>Ibid.</ref> "It's a chemical that the oil industry makes to sell to itself, basically," said Richard Charter, a senior policy adviser for Defenders of Wildlife.<ref>Ibid.</ref>

Corexit was found to be one of the most toxic dispersal agents ever developed.<ref>''Acute Aquatic Toxicity of Three Corexit Products: An Overview'', Anita George-Ares and James R. Clark. Report prepared for Exxon Biomedical Sciences.</ref> With seasonal warming of water temperature the toxicity grows. Corexit is banned in the [[United Kingdom]] due to [[environment]]al concerns.<ref>[http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/05/epa-bp-dispersants Why Is the EPA Letting BP Use Dirty Dispersants?], Kate Sheppard, ''Mother Jones'', 19 May 19 2010.</ref> The Obama EPA gave BP the green light to apply Corexit to the spill.<ref>Ibid.</ref> At the Congressional hearing investigating the Gulf oil spill disaster, [[Democratic]] Representative Jerrold Nadler of [[New York]] raised the prospect of "thousands and thousands of people getting sick or dying" as a result of the administration's sanctioned use of the dispersant.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/science/earth/28workers.html Worry About Dispersant Rises as Men in Work Crew Complain of Health Problems,] Leslie Kaufman and Elizabeth Rosenthal, ''New York Times'', 27 May 2010.</ref> Critics allege use of dispersants like Corexit are largely for cosmetic purposes. Nalco has been a frequent contributor to the campaign of Sen. [[Mary Landrieu]]<ref>http://saveourwetlands.org/index-landrieu.html/</ref> of Louisiana.<ref>http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/fec/?id=273&cycle=2007-2008</ref>

== Deepwater Horizon ==
[[File:Deepwater Horizon Fire.jpg|right|250px|thumb|Fire boat response crews battle the blazing remnants of the off shore oil rig Deepwater Horizon, April 21, 2010 (U.S. Coast Guard)]]
On [[Earth Day]] 2010, a BP-leased oil drilling rig sank to the bottom of the [[Gulf of Mexico]] two days after it exploded, creating what has been described as the "worst environmental disaster in [[American History Lectures|US history]]."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/x-33986-Political-Spin-Examiner~y2010m4d29-Worst-environmental-disaster-in-US-history-Oil-slick-in-Gulf-of-Mexico-is-set-on-fire Worst environmental disaster in US history,] Maryann Tobin, ''Examiner'', April 29, 2010.</ref> [[Secretary of the Interior]] [[Ken Salazar]] told [[CNN]] "It potentially is catastrophic," and "I think we have to prepare for the worst."<ref>[http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/gulf-oil-spill:-impossible-to-measure-impact-of-%22unprecedented-environmental-disaster%22-477603.html?tickers=BP,HAL,CAM,RIG,XLE,OIL,USO Gulf Oil Spill: Impossible to Measure Impact of "Unprecedented Environmental Disaster",] Aaron Task, May 03, 2010. Retrieved from Yahoo Finance 12 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/02/salazar-oil-spill-massive-and-a-potential-catastrophe/ Salazar: Oil spill 'massive' and a potential catastrophe,] [[CNN]], 3 May 2010.</ref>

Congressional investigators think they have identified the rigs blowout preventer as the cause of the explosion. <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703339304575240323493707434.html Congress Homes In on Rig's Blowout Preventer,] Ben Casselman and Jennifer Levitz, ''Wall Street Journal Online,'' 13 May 2010.</ref> The blowout preventer was leaking hydraulic fluid, had a dead battery,<ref>Ibid.</ref> and was inspected by the Obama [[Minerals Management Service]] (MMS) only two weeks before to the explosion<ref>White House Press Office, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/press-briefing-bp-oil-spill-gulf-coast Press Briefing on the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf Coast,] 29 April 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 12 May 2010.</ref> which killed 11 people. [[Amy Goodman]], a [[leftist]] radio talk show host, has suggested those responsible should be [[prosecute]]d for [[manslaughter]].<ref>[http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/law_order_corporate_crime_unit_20100518/ Law & Order,] Amy Goodman, 18 May 2010. Retrieved from truthdigg.com 30 May 2010.</ref>

Blowout preventers are meant to shut off the well, and the last line of defense is a set of shear rams which cut the pipe and seal off the well.<ref>Congress Homes In on Rig's Blowout Preventer, Ben Casselman and Jennifer Levitz, ''WSJ Online,'' 13 May 2010.</ref> The MMS, the [[Obama administration]] agency that regulates offshore drilling along with the Coast Guard, is supposed to require proof that shear rams are powerful enough to shut the well. Michael Saucier, MMS's regional supervisor testified before Congress that the MMS did not require BP to file a "scenario for potential blowout."<ref>Ibid.</ref> The MMS certified that BP "has the capacity to respond, to the maximum extent practicable, to a worst-case discharge, or a substantial threat of such a discharge."<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/29/gulf-oil-spill-exceeds-bp_n_556798.html</ref>

A May 2010 Inspector General's report revealed at least two MMS regulatory inspectors admitted to being under the influence of the [[illegal drug]] [[methamphetamine]] while on the job.<ref>[http://www.wusf.usf.edu/news/2010/05/25/drugs_free_football_tickets_and_porn_at_minerals_management_service Drugs, Free Football Tickets and Porn at Minerals Management Service,] 25 May 2010. Retrieved from wusf.usf.edu 26 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.tgdaily.com/business-and-law-features/49932-us-bureaucrats-smoked-crystal-meth-watched-porn-as-bp-oil-rig-blew US bureaucrats smoked crystal meth, watched porn as BP oil rig blew,] Starr Keshet, 25 May 2010. Retrieved from tgdaily.com 26 May 2010.</ref>

==Environmental disaster ==
[[File:Oil slick map.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Projections of the flow of the spill over the summer of 2010. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37497578/ns/local_news-new_york_ny/] ]]
On 29 April 2010 oil began washing ashore in Plaquemines Parish, [[Louisiana]]; four weeks later local leaders still were begging [[President Obama]] for federal assistance in responding to the disaster which was overtaking hundreds of miles of shoreline.<ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/26/gulf.oil.spill.plaquemines/index.html Plaquemines Parish president blasts federal response to oil spill,] CNN, 26 May 2010.</ref>

Crude oil has washed into marshes, estuaries and onto beaches in [[Mississippi]] and [[Alabama]]. Wildlife has been killed and efforts are underway to save oil-coated
birds. Without capping the well [[Florida]]'s Everglades may be turned into a "dead zone." Scientists expect currents to carry the oil slick to the eastern seaboard of the [[United States]], fouling beaches and estuaries like the [[Chesapeake Bay]] and fishing grounds of the Grand Banks off [[Newfoundland]].

=== Silverfish ===

Most scientists agree that Corexit 9500 will have a much larger biological effect when it reaches coastal areas teeming with wildlife.<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref> Many species are being threatened at a crucial time in their life cycle.<ref>[http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2818588720100428 FACTBOX-Possible environmental impact of Gulf oil spill,] ''[[Reuters]]'', 28 April 2010.</ref> In testing done by the U.S. [[Environmental Protection Agency]] the dispersant Corexit 9500 was found to be extremely lethal to silverfish, a benchmark [[organism]] in [[toxic]]ity testing.<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>

=== Gulf menhaden ===

Gulf menhaden are a [[specie]]s harvested mostly for fish meal and fish oil. Menhaden could be badly affected
by the spill.

=== Coral, oyster and shrimp ===

Corals, oyster and shrimp likewise are critically affected. Richard Charter, a foremost expert on marine biology and oil spills who is a senior policy advisor for Marine Programmes for Defenders of Wildlife and is chairman of the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council has said, “There is a [[chemical]] [[toxic]]ity to the dispersant compound that in many ways is worse than oil,” which "in so doing you may be more seriously damaging the ecosystem offshore.”<ref>Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic. Retreived from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref> Shrimp were found to be extremely vulnerable to the lethal effects of the chemical dispersant Corexit 9500 used by [[Obama administration]] disaster relief agencies and BP in testing done by the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA).<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>

=== Brown pelican ===
[[File:Dead birds and sea turtles.jpg|right|325px|thumb|Dead birds and sea turtles. ]]
The [[Louisiana]] state bird, the Brown Pelican, was removed from protection under the U.S. Endangered Species Act in 2009. The Obama administration approved BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling rig without the proper environmental impact assessment (EIA) required by law. The disaster occurred just as breeding season commenced.

=== Other bird species ===

Other species endangered by the oil spill are American oystercatcher and Wilson's plover.

=== Sea turtles ===

As several species of sea turtles move through the Gulf during their spring nesting season, they need to surface to breathe.

=== Toxic oil spill rain ===
A report prepared by the [[Russia]]n Ministry of Natural Resources warned that the leaking [[crude oil]] into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] is about to become the worst [[environment]]al catastrophe in all of human history, threatening the entire eastern half of [[North America]] with “total destruction.” Russian scientists based the assessment on the use of millions of gallons of the government approved chemical dispersant Corexit.

The Russian scientists outlined that Corexit, with its 2.61ppm [[toxic]]ity level, combined with the seasonal warming of Gulf of Mexico waters, the [[molecule]]s will be able to “phase transition” from their present [[liquid]] to a gaseous state allowing them to be absorbed into clouds and released as “toxic rain” upon all of Eastern North America.

The scientists warned should a [[Hurricane Katrina]] like storm form in the Gulf while tens of millions of gallons of Corexit are floating on or near the surface, the resulting “toxic rain” falling upon the North American continent could “theoretically” destroy all microbial life to any depth it reaches resulting in an “unimaginable environmental catastrophe” destroying all kinds of life forms.<ref>[http://www.eutimes.net/2010/05/toxic-oil-spill-rains-warned-could-destroy-north-america/ Toxic oil spill rains warned could destroy North America,'] EUTimes, 24 May 2010. Retrieved 3 June 2010.</ref>

== The response ==

Initially [[Department of Homeland Security]] and the [[U.S. Coast Guard]] reported on 23 April 2010 there was no leak from the sunken oil rig.<ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-04-23-deepwater-horizon_N.htm Coast Guard: No oil leaking from sunken rig,] Rick Jervis, ''[[USA TODAY]]'', 23 April 2010.</ref> The next day the [[Obama administration]] officially estimated a leak from the sunken well at 1000 barrels per day.<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/24/oil-rig-deepwater-horizon_0_n_550849.html Oil Rig, Deepwater Horizon, Leaking Into Gulf Of Mexico,] Cain Burdeau, 4 April 2010. Retrieved from the ''[[Huffington Post]],'' 15 May 2010.</ref> The ''[[Associated Press]]'' reported it took nine days after the explosion and loss of life before President Obama made his first comments on the disaster.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100509/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_gulf_oil_spill_obama_s_response Obama oil response: aggressive as crisis unfolded,] ,H. Josef Hebert and Erica Werner, ''Associated Press'', 9 May 2010. Retrieved from news.yahoo.com 2 June 2010.</ref> BP's stock fell<ref>[http://in.reuters.com/article/idINLDE63S0HR20100429 European shares turn negative; BP falls,] ''Reuters'' 29 April 2010.</ref> on news of the "the worsening oil spill" and administration estimates were raised to 5000 barrels per day.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/29/us/29spill.html Size of Spill in Gulf of Mexico Is Larger Than Thought,] Campbell Robertson and Leslie Kaufman, ''New York Times,'' 28 April 2010. Retrieved 15 May 2010.</ref> and appointed a national incident commander.<ref>http://wallstcheatsheet.com/breaking-news/a-timeline-of-the-bp-oil-spill-crisis-pics/?p=10743/</ref>

=== U.S. Government dumps toxic dispersants into the Gulf of Mexico ===
[[File:Dispersants spraying.jpg|left|300px|thumb|Aerial image of the [[United States]] [[government]]'s dumping [[toxic]] disperants into the [[Gulf of Mexico]]. ]]
''Wired Science'' reports the [[Obama administration]] disaster-relief agencies are using a toxic chemical to disperse oil in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster. Use of dispersants are said to be a public relations strategy.<ref>[http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/05/gulf-dispersants/ Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative,] Brandon Keim, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from ''Wired Science'' 15 May 2010.</ref> Secretary [[Janet Napolitano]] of the [[Department of Homeland Security]] acknowledged<ref>[http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/ Obama: Oil spill bill on BP, Chem spray to save nature,] Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Updates, 04th May 2010. Retrieved from oilspillupdates.com 29 May 2010.</ref> the U.S government was dumping toxic chemicals from [[C-130]] cargo aircraft onto the spill.<ref>[http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2010-05-02/news/os-oil-disaster-chemical-cleanup-20100502_1_dispersant-spill-crude Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix,] Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref> Jackie Savitz of the ocean-conservation group Oceana stated the use of dispersants is only slightly less horrendous than the Gulf oil spill itself. "You're basically pouring chemicals into the ocean, which is never a good thing."<ref>Ibid.</ref> According to a 2009 [[Environmental Protection Agency]] report dispersants have not been used in the United State prior to the Obama administration's approval at BP'S request "because of possible long-term environmental effects, difficulties with timely and effective application, disagreement among [[scientist]]s and research data about their environmental effects, effectiveness, and [[toxic]]ity concerns" and the effects "are still unknown."<ref>Ibid.</ref> Residents in areas close to the oil spill have reported odors and symptoms such as [[headache]]s, dizziness, [[nausea]], eye irritation, and respiratory problems.<ref>[http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/gsolomon/gulf_oil_spill_air_quality_upd.html Gulf Oil Spill Air Quality,] Gina Solomon, 24 May 2010. Retrieved from Natural Resources Defense Council Staff Blog, 3 June 2010.</ref>

=== Disregard for worker safety ===
[[File:Cleaup300.jpg|right|275px|thumb|Cleanup workers exposed to the Obama adminsitration's decision to use known [[toxic]] substances to disperse the spill. Critics allege dispersants are ineffective and largely for cosmetic purposes. ]]
The ''[[Guardian (uk)]]'' has reported the controversy over Corexit exposes the [[Obama administration]] to criticism that its scientific agencies have been too accommodating to BP's strategy. In addition to the use of Corexit, the Obama [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA) came under fire for withholding test results on the toxicity of the water close to shore.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/20/gulf-oil-spill-chemical-dispersant</ref>

The dispersant 2-BE is known to cause heath dangers to clean up workers<ref>http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/gsolomon/oil_spill_clean-up_workers_get.html</ref> and wildlife alike.<ref>[http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2010/chem_dispersants_work_at_cost Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic.] Retrieved from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref> 2-BE has been documented to cause the breakdown of [[red blood cell]]s, leading to blood in urine and feces, and can damage the kidneys, liver, spleen and [[bone marrow]] of humans – effects not included on the information sheet for workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The dispersant Corexit 9500 is associated with headaches, vomiting and reproductive problems as sides effects to clean-up workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref> Lawrence Duffy of the University of Alaska claims dispersants "are more a public relations measure than a preventive one. It has an effect on our psychology because we don't see the oil slick,"<ref>Ibid.</ref> though oil particles continue to do damage.<ref>Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix, Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref>

=== Government mismanagement of relief efforts ===

Three weeks into the disaster [[National Public Radio]] reported the [[Obama administration]]'s official figures were still grossly underestimated<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126809525 Gulf Spill May Far Exceed Official Estimates,] Richard Harris, ''National Public Radio,'' 14 May 2010.</ref> and after the first month it was finally admitted the spill was nearly three times larger than earlier thought.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/us/28flow.html Estimates Suggest Spill Is Biggest in U.S. History,] Tom Zeller, Jr., ''New York Times'', 27 May 2010.</ref>

Federal officials did not begin burning the leaking oil off the surface of the water until one full week after the rig collapsed.<ref>[http://blog.al.com/live/2010/04/burning_should_have_started_a.html Burning should have started a week ago, former NOAA official says,] Ben Raines, ''Mobile Press-Register'', 29 April 2010.</ref> Louisiana Governor [[Bobby Jindal]] criticized [[President Obama]] for his slow response.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzEntQPr9OA</ref> ''The New York Times'' castigated the [[White House]] for delays and not moving quick enough, calling the evidence "damning" and declaring the Gulf oil spill a "huge disaster whose consequences might have been minimized with swifter action" from the [[Obama administration]].<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/01/opinion/01sat1.html Unanswered Questions on the Spill,] ''New York Times'' Editorial, 30 April 2010.</ref> One month into the spill, [[Democrat]]ic stalwarts [[James Carville]],<ref>[http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2521614/posts Is James Carville racist?], 26 May 2010. Retrieved from freerepublic.com 30 May 2010.</ref> [[Chris Matthews]],<ref>http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37632.html#ixzz0om46RhGH</ref> and Donna Brazile<ref>http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/99375-donna-brazile-calls-obamas-oil-spill-response-not-tough-enough</ref> criticized the inept and bungled response to the spreading catastrophe.
[[File:Finalisttransoce.jpeg|left|250px|thumb|Chris Oynes (left) of the Mineral Management Service presents Keelan Adamson (right) of Transocean the MMS's, ''Safety Award for Excellence'' (SAFE),<ref>http://www.mms.gov/awards/SAFEcriteria.htm</ref> at the MMS National Award luncheon, 7 May 2009.<ref>http://www.beaconmag.com/gomrigteamswinmm.html</ref> ''Source: Beacon magazine'']]
The [[White House]] lacked any type of plan to combat the disaster. [[U.S. House of Representatives|House]] Democratic Majority Leader [[Steny Hoyer]] publicly admitted that the [[Obama Administration]] was ill-prepared to deal with the situation. <ref>[http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2010/04/mms-thought-deepwater-horizon-was-awardwinningly-safe.html MMS Thought Deepwater Horizon was Award-Winningly SAFE,] The Project on Government Oversight, Exposing Government Corruption, 29 April 2010.</ref> While the disaster steadily grew, Obama did not discuss the crisis at length until he appeared at a photo op at Venice, Louisiana on 3 May 2010.<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126467960 Obama Says Oil Spill Damage Could Be Unprecedented,] Scott Horsley, [[NPR]], 3 May 2010.</ref> He would order a moratorium on all future deep sea oil platforms until they determine the problems associated with the current situation. As to be expected, Obama tries to remove himself from blame saying "the system failed", this despite the fact the he heads the system. Then he pointed fingers of blame at oil companies while taking an indirect jab at the Bush administration. <ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20005039-503544.html Angry Obama Seeks to Deflect Blame for Gulf Oil Spill Crisis, CBS, May 14, 2010]</ref>
{{cquote|For too long, for a decade or more, there has been a cozy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agency that permits them to drill. It seems as if permits were too often issued based on little more than assurances of safety from the oil companies. That cannot and will not happen anymore.}}
White House spokesman [[Robert Gibbs]] did his best to put a good spin on the disaster claiming the response was "comprehensive and fast." Meanwhile, the [[Democrat]]-led Congress ordered public hearings from oil executives. President Obama blamed others saying the answers from oil executives were a "ridiculous spectacle," "You had executives of BP and Transocean and Halliburton falling over each other to point the finger of blame at somebody else." <ref>[http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/burning_rig_of_fire_VkeuMCffwTUd9IBS7gUV7K?CMP=OTC-rss&FEEDNAME=#ixzz0oWm4u9zQ New look at Gulf oil spill as cleanup continues, NYPost, May 15, 2010]</ref> As the disaster progressed and questions arose over the government's misreporting and withholding<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/bp-feds-withheld-videos-showing-massive-scope-oil/story?id=10819367 BP and Feds Withheld Videos Showing Massive Scope of Oil Spill:] Coast Guard Told Public Not to 'Fixate' On Rate of Spill While Sitting On Video, Brian Ross, Matthew York, and Avni Patel, ABC News, 3 June 2010.</ref> of information from the [[public]] about the true dimensions of the calamity, the ''[[Associated Press]]'' noted,
{{cquote|First [Obama] was going to make BP pay for the Gulf oil mess. Then he declared himself in charge. Now he's trying to find out 'whose ass to kick' and making clear he'd fire BP's chief if only he could.<ref>http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100608/D9G7C5U00.html</ref>}}

=== Revitalizing cap and trade energy tax ===
:''Main article:'' '''[[Cap and trade]]'''
[[President Obama]] has been roundly criticized by [[Democrat]]s and [[Republican]]s alike for attempting to use the [[nation]]al tragedy to revitalized his failed Cap and Trade energy proposals. The Obama proposal, widely perceived as a job-killer tax increase, has stalled in the [[U.S. Senate]]. [[California]] Senator [[Dianne Feinstein]] has stated the climate bill "isn't going to stop the oil leak."<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/15/obamas-pitch-energy-speech-gulf-crisis-infuriates-republicans/ Obama Draws Bipartisan Criticism for Using Oil Spill to Push Energy Policy,] [[FOXNews]].com, 16 June 2010.</ref>

[[Environmentalist]]s want the President to push the program. Fred Krupp of the Environmental Defense Fund calls the opportunity "a political moment" to pass a carbon tax estimated to cost the average U.S. household $4300 per year.<ref>[http://blog.heritage.org/2009/05/15/the-4300-energy-tax/ The $4300 Energy Tax,] Nicolas Loris, 15 May 2009. Retrieved from Heritage.org, 19 June 2010.</ref>

Joel Benenson, who conducted polling for Obama’s presidential campaign, thinks the tax increase could pass, but wary Senate Democrats say otherwise. “There’s not a great call for it" said [[West Virginia]] Democratic Senator [[Jay Rockefeller]]. “It’s unrelated” to the immediate crisis in the Gulf noted Senator [[Ben Nelson]], Democrat from [[Nebraska]].<ref>[http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-16/democrats-say-climate-bill-lacks-momentum-after-spill-update3-.html Democrats Say Climate Bill Lacks Momentum After Spill,] Lisa Lerer and Simon Lomax, ''Bloomberg'', 16 June 2010. </ref>

=== Assistance of foreign governments ===
Nearly two-months after the disaster took place, the Obama administration decides to utilize the assistance offered by 17 countries, the U.N and the European Union. <ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/13/AR2010061304232.html After delays, [[U.S.]] begins to tap foreign aid for gulf oil spill, WaPo, June 14, 2010]</ref> International aid offers already accepted include two skimmers and 2.6 miles (4.2 kilometers) of boom from [[Mexico]], three sets of sweeping arm systems from the Netherlands and 1.86 miles (3.0 kilometers) of boom from Canada, the State Department said. The State Department noted that it has assisted BP in directly sourcing equipment and technical experts from around the world, including from Algeria, Australia, Bahrain, [[Brazil]], [[Canada]], China, Denmark, Latvia, Norway, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, and the [[United Kingdom]]. <ref>[http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/breakingnews/view/20100615-275709/US-taps-into-foreign-assistance-for-Gulf-oil-spill US taps into foreign assistance for Gulf oil spill, Agence France-Presse, June 15, 2010]</ref>

===Public relations offensive===
Faced with declining poll numbers and a public relations calamity, [[President Obama]] took to the airwaves nearly 60 days into the spill. A ''New York Times'' Op-ed commented,
{{cquote|All we got from President Obama was a vague call for some sort of new energy policy. Plus a Gulf Coast Restoration Plan, an oil spill study commission, a reminder that the secretary of energy won a Nobel Prize in physics and 17 references to God, prayer, blessings or faith.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/opinion/17collins.html The Boring Speech Policy,] Gail Collins, ''New York Times'' Op-ed, 16 June 2010.</ref><ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2010/06/17/behar-laments-shocking-bush-obama-garofalo-slams-anti-intellectual-pr Behar Panel Sees '[[Bush]]-Like' and '[[Corporatist]]' [[Obama]], [[Janeane Garofalo|Garofalo]] Slams 'Anti-Intellectual' [[Prayer]],] Joy Behar Show, [[CNN]]. Retrieved from newsbusters.org, 20 June 2010.</ref>}}
Former speechwriter for President [[Jimmy Carter]], [[Chris Matthews]], chided the President after his address to the nation,
{{cquote|Ludicrous that he keeps saying [Secretary of Energy] [[Steven Chu|Chu]] has a [[Nobel prize]]. I'll barf if he does it one more time.<ref>[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/06/15/msnbc_trashes_obamas_address_compared_to_carter_i_dont_sense_executive_command.html MSNBC Trashes Obama's Address: Compared To Carter, "I Don't Sense Executive Command,"]. Retrieved from RealClearPolitics.com, 20 June 2010.</ref>}}

==Economic impacts==
[[File:Oilslick.png|right|275px|thumb| Oil slick map as of May 30, 2010.]]
The economic impact of the [[Gulf of Mexico]] oil drilling disaster will be large and devastating to several key industries, including fishing, tourism, and transportation.<ref>[http://www.ihsglobalinsight.com/Perspective/PerspectiveDetail18638.htm Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Gulf Coast Oil Spill,] Nariman Behravesh, 4 May 2010. Retrieved from ihsglobalinsights.com 8 May 2020.</ref>

The top commercial species in terms of value are shrimp ($367 million), menhaden ($64 million), oysters ($59 million), and blue crab ($38 million).<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Fisheries Economics of the United States, Silver Spring, MD, 2008.</ref> As of 25 May 2010, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) closed 54,096 square miles to commercial and recreational fishing.<ref>http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/deepwater_horizon_oil_spill.htm</ref> These areas are some of the richest fishing grounds in the Gulf of Mexico for major commercial species such as white shrimp, blue crab, and oysters.

===Employment in fishing===
The most immediate economic impact of the oil spill has been on the Gulf fishing<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/video/asset/fishing-industry-hammered-by-gulf-oil-spill/41612D0E-B338-464D-A15E-5885B1D227D6</ref> industry. The number of [[job]]s at stake, which includes seafood processing and related wholesale and retail, is over 200,000 with related [[economic]] activity of $5.5 billion.<ref>[http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41262.pdf Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Selected Issues for Congress,] Curry L. Hagerty and Jonathan L. Ramseur, Congressional Research Service, 27 May 2010. (pdf p. 2.).</ref>

Dockside sales in [[Louisiana]] are approximately $660 million.<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Departtment of Commerce, [http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st5/publication/econ/2008/FEUS%202008%20ALL.pdf Fisheries Economics of the United States,] Silver Spring, MD, 2008. (pdf).</ref> Loses to the Louisiana fishing could be as high as $2.5 billion.<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/story/insurers-brace-for-liability-hit-from-oil-spill-2010-05-05</ref>

===Employment in tourism===

The tourist industry employs 620,000 people who earn over $9 billion in wages in the Gulf of Mexico region. Analysts say [[Florida]] alone could lose $3 billion in tourism.<ref>[http://www.royalgazette.com/rg/Article/article.jsp?articleId=7da532730030019&sectionId=65 Insurance industry concern grows over oil spill liability,] Alistair Barr, ''Royal Press Gazette'', 6 May 2010.</ref>

In 2008, recreational anglers took 25.4 million fishing trips and spent over $12 billion on equipment and trips in the Gulf region.<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Fisheries Economics of the United States, Silver Spring, MD, 2008.</ref> Some of the most popular recreational species include snappers, several types of drum, sheepshead, and Spanish mackerel. Recreational fisheries support businesses such as charters, bait and tackle, and services such as restaurants and hotels.

In 2000, 21.9 million people visited Gulf beaches and accounted for 177.2 million beach days.<ref>Brent Ache, David Bylsma, and Kristen Crossett, et al., The Gulf of Mexico at a Glance, National Ocean Service, NOAA, A Tool for the Gulf of Mexico Alliance and the American Public, Washington, DC, 2008. [http://gulfofmexicoalliance.org/pdfs/gulf_glance_1008.pdf pdf].</ref>

===Transportation===
The Offshore Marine Service Association (OMSA),<ref>[http://www.marinelog.com/DOCS/NEWSMMIX/2010jun00034.html OMSA slams offshore drilling moratorium,] 3 June 2010. Retrieved from Marinelog.com, 19 June 2010.</ref> the national trade association for U.S. flag vessels in the energy sector, criticized the [[Obama administration]]'s moratorium on offshore drilling projects. 100,000 jobs were immediately affected by the president's decision as companies began cancelling contracts to carry supplies, forcing layoffs. "The industry has struggled to climb out of a severe economic downturn. The moratorium threatens any hope of recovery and creates the potential for economic hardship that could last a decade or longer," remarked OMSA President Ken Wells.

OMSA estimates that for every mariner who works on-board a vessel, there are nine other Americans working in shore-side jobs that support vessel operations. Beyond the vessel crew, the negative consequences of the moratorium could impact everyone from service technicians supporting everything from diesel engines to the air condition systems to the local grocer who supplies food for the boat's galley.

Offshore vessels are a major part of the tax base in many coastal communities. Gulf Coast state and local government revenues will also decrease due to lower [[income tax]] and [[sales tax]] collections.

Disruption of shipping traffic in and out of the Port of [[New Orleans]] will impact barge, container, and tanker traffic in the Mississippi Delta and along the [[Mississippi River]]. Prices of all types of commodities would affected.

=== Insurance industry ===

BP, the operator on the oil drilling lease with a 65% stake, insured itself, rather than buying coverage from insurance companies. Industry analysts estimate total costs related to the oil spill cleanup and damages could exceed $14 billion. <ref>[http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKLDE6410IJ20100502 U.S. oil spill could bill could exceed $14 billion,] Tom Bergin, ''Reuters,'' 2 May 2010.</ref>

=== Lost revenue to state and local governments ===
:'''Louisiana'''
A Greater New Orleans study indicates the [[Obama administration]]'s moratorium could cost [[Louisiana]] as many as 22,000 jobs and more than $782 million in revenues.

With the average deepwater rig employing 230 workers with an average salary of $98,000, the study puts the tax revenue impact at $151 million if drilling were to resume within 18 months. Greater New Orleans President and CEO Michael Hecht says it’s difficult to be optimistic based on President Obama’s [[Oval Office]] address on 15 June 2010. President Obama's action “has the potential to turn an ecological tragedy into an economic calamity,” Hecht said.<ref>[http://neworleanscitybusiness.com/blog/2010/06/16/study-moratorium-could-cost-up-to-22000-jobs-782m-in-lost-revenue/ Study: Moratorium could cost up to 22,000 jobs, $782M in lost revenue,] Greg LaRose, ''New Orleans City Business'', 16 June 2010.</ref> The study foresees in a worse case scenario the loss of more than 22,000 jobs, 3,450 of them directly tied to the operating rigs and 18,945 with indirect ties such as catering firms and other companies that serve U.S energy producers.

Fearing that the drilling moratorium "could exacerbate, rather than alleviate, the impacts of this spill upon both our [[economy]] and our [[environment]]," U.S. Senator [[Mary Landrieu]] wrote to President Obama on 11 June 2010.<ref>http://landrieu.senate.gov/mediacenter/pressreleases/06-11-2010-1.cfm</ref> Landrieu stated,
{{Cquote|more than 300,000 Louisianians are employed either directly or indirectly by the oil and gas industry. ..The immediate impacts to the economy are devastating enough: idling the 33 rigs currently permitted to drill in the deepwater Gulf would immediately impact [[employment]] for roughly 38,000 crewmen, deck hands, engineers, welders, ROV operators, caterers, helicopter pilots, and others who operate and service these vessels. That's like closing 12 large motor vehicle assembly plants in one state, all at once.}}

Lost state and local tax revenues will accrue at a rate between $8 million and $15 million a month. Federal royalty losses will be substantial and a significant drop in tolls collected for the Louisiana Highway 1 bridge at Leeville, the main artery to the Port Fourchon energy port is projected as well.
:'''Texas'''
The [[Texas]] state comptroller’s office reported collection of $2.3 billion in oil and natural gas production taxes in fiscal year 2009 and $4.1 billion in 2008. The tax revenue is used to repair roads and fund schools, among other state services. Although no official analysis of President Obama's decision to place a moratorium on offshore production has been compiled yet, the Texas comptroller’s office said it’s unclear how much of an impact the president's decision will have on state services. Experts warn the president's decision could threaten tens of thousands of jobs in the [[Houston]] area.<ref>[http://www.kvue.com/news/state/Deepwater-drilling-moratorium-threatens-Texas-tax-revenue-95848579.html Deepwater drilling moratorium threatens Texas' tax revenue,] Gabe Gutierrez, 8 June 2010. Retrieved from kvue.com, 20 June 2010.</ref>
:'''Alabama'''
Manufacturing jobs in [[Alabama]] are at risk as a result of [[President Obama]]'s actions, as no new orders for equipment are coming in.<ref>[http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=94652 NOIA Member Cos Feel Drilling Moratorium Impacts,] National Ocean Industries Association, 11 June 2010.</ref>

=== Increased dependency on foreign oil ===

[[New Jersey]] Democrat Senator [[Robert Menendez]] proposed a ban on new offshore drilling permits and submitted a bill that would retroactively raise the financial liability of BP from $75 million to $10 billion. <ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/05/senator-menendez-on-oil-spill-no-new-drilling-permits.html Senator Menendez on Oil Spill: No New Drilling Permits, ABCNews, May 12, 2010]</ref> Oklahoma [[Republican]] Senator [[James Inhofe]] successfully killed the bill saying it would reduce competition and shut down smaller independent oil companies in favor of larger companies.

=== Too big to fail ===
An oil industry trade publication<ref>[http://oilprice.com/Environment/Oil-Spills/The-Cover-up-BP-s-Crude-Politics-and-the-Looming-Environmental-Mega-Disaster.html The Cover-up: BP's Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster,] Wayne Madsen, 06 May 2010. Retrieved from oilprice.com 6 June 2010.</ref> reports [[President Obama]] and senior White House staff, as well as Interior Secretary [[Ken Salazar]], are working with BP on [[legislation]] that would raise the cap on [[liability]] for damage claims from those affected by the oil disaster from $75 million to $10 billion. However the disaster has the real potential of costing nearly $1 trillion. Critics point out that in the deal between Obama and BP, $10 billion is a drop in the bucket for a trillion dollar disaster. Talk is noted in government circles, including [[FEMA]], of the need to nationalize BP in order to compensate those who will ultimately be affected by the worst oil disaster in the history of the world, and BP would, if its assets were nationalized, be credited with almost a trillion dollars for compensation purposes.<ref>[http://www.infowars.com/the-cover-up-bps-crude-politics-and-the-looming-environmental-mega-disaster-2/ The Cover-up: BP's Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster,] Wayne Madsen, 06 May 2010. Retrieved from infowars.com 6 June 2010.</ref><ref>[http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/31/why_obama_should_put_bp_under_temporary_receiversh/ Why Obama Should Put BP Under Temporary Receivership,] [[Obama_doublespeak#Change|Robert Reich]], 31 May 2010. Retrieved from talkingpointsmemo.com, 6 June 2010.</ref>

After Obama charged [[Attorney General]] [[Eric Holder]] to investigate the disaster, BP establish a $20 billion extrajudicial fund managed by an Obama appointee.<ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37574 Obama's Latest Shakedown,] David Limbaugh, ''Human Events'', 06/20/2010.</ref> Former [[CNN]] news writer and radio talk show host Mike Malloy suggested Holder is beholden to [[corporatist]] interests.<ref>[http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100603042451.aspx The AG vs. BP: Little Skepticism on ABC and NBC, While Lefty Talker Blasts Holder as 'Corporatist' Pretender], Rich Noyes, Media Research Center, 3 June 2010.</ref>
[[File:Energy Tax bill.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Estimated impact of Obama Energy Tax in job losses. Total job loss: 2.2 million. ''Source: National Black Chamber of Commerce'' [http://www.nationalbcc.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=750:nbcc-study-generates-concerns-about-waxmanmarkey-climate-change-bill-costs-are-high-but-benefits-are-uncertain&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=7] ]]

== Criticism of the Obama administration's handling of the disaster ==
[[File:Memorial for oil workers.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Memorial service for the 11 workers killed in the explosion. ''Reuters'' [http://www.daylife.com/photo/00nya1C9URdAy?q=Mississippi] ]]
Former top adviser to President [[Bill Clinton]], [[James Carville]], turned visibly emotional in a interview with [[George Stephanopoulos]] on [[ABC]]'s ''[[Good Morning America]]'' over [[President Barack Obama]]'s "lackadaisical" response to the Gulf oil spill disaster.
{{Cquote|The political [[stupid]]ity is unbelievable. ... The President of the United States could have come down here. He could have been involved with the families of these 11 people...... He could have implemented a plan in anticipation of this... He could be commandeering tankers and making BP bring tankers in and clean this up.... He could be deploying people to the coast. He could be with the corps of engineers and the Coast Guard with these people in Plaquemines Parish, doing something about these regulations. These people are crying. They're begging for something down here. And it just looks like he's not involved in this! Man, you have got to get down here and take control of this! Put somebody in charge of this and get this thing moving! We're about to die down here!<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/bp-oil-spill-political-headache-obama-democrats-slam/story?id=10746519 'Political Stupidity': Democrat James Carville Slams Obama's Response to BP Oil Spill; Democratic Strategist Said White House Should've Acted Quickly: 'We're About to Die Down Here',] Jake Tapper and Huma Khan, ''Good Morning America,'' 26 May 2010. Retrieved from abcnews.go.com 28 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0526/unhinged-carville-obama-gulf/ Unhinged Carville goes off on Obama on oil spill, The Raw Story, May 26, 2010]</ref><ref>http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasalert/2010/20100526121155.aspx</ref>}}
Carville also said in a separate interview on [[CNN]] with [[Anderson Cooper]],
{{Cquote|They are risking everything by this ‘go along with BP’ strategy they have. They seem, like, lackadaisical on this...they seem like they’re inconvenienced by this, this is some giant thing getting in their way and somehow or another, if you let BP handle it, it’ll all go away. It’s not going away. It’s growing out there. It is a disaster of the first magnitude...the government thinks that they are partnering with BP. I think they actually believe that BP has some kind of a good motivation here. That’s one of the, sort of, whole flaws is they're naïve.<ref>[http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1005/23/sotu.01.html State of the Union with Candy Crowley,] CNN, 23 May 2010. Retrieved 20 May 2010.</ref><ref>http://www.mediaite.com/tv/james-carville-obama-administration-seems-inconvenienced-by-bp-oil-spill/</ref>}}
Obama acknowledged the criticism days later in a televised press conference:
{{Cquote|Where I was wrong was in my belief that the oil companies had their act together when it came to worst-case scenarios.<ref>Remarks by President Obama on the Gulf Oil Spill, Office of the Press Secretary, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 29 May 2010.</ref>}}
[[File:Day12 comedyskit1.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Day 12 of the Disaster: Obama enjoys an evening of levity and banter with the Washington Press Corps at the White House Correspondent's Dinner.]]
[[MSNBC]] talk show host [[Chris Matthews]]<ref>Matthews said of Obama during the Potomac Primaries, "it's part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama's speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often." [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/13/chris-matthews-i-felt-thi_n_86449.html]</ref> said on [[Jay Leno]]'s ''Tonight Show'',
{{Cquote|The president scares me. He's been acting a little like a Vatican Observer here. When is he actually going to do something? And I worry. I know he doesn't want to take ownership of it. I know politics. He said the minute he says, 'I'm in charge,' he takes the blame.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100524/pl_ynews/ynews_pl2219 White House seeks to fend off growing chorus of critics on handling of Gulf spill,] ''Yahoo News'', 24 May 2010. Retrieved 30 May 2010.</ref>}}

[[Secretary of State]] [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]'s presidential campaign manager in 2008 questioned if [[Democratic]] primary [[voter]]s had
{{Cquote|underestimated the value of experience and crisis management as important attributes for their president.<ref>[http://topics.npr.org/article/04M3gpJa4p92Z?q=NPR Did 2008 Democratic primary voters underestimate value of experience?] Alex Pappas, ''The Daily Caller'', 06/06/10. Retrieved from npr.org, 6 June 2010.</ref>}}

Donna Brazile, who managed the presidential campaign of Democratic [[candidate]] [[Al Gore]] in 2000 said on [[ABC]]'s ''[[This Week]]'',
{{Cquote|One of the problems I have with the administration is that they're not tough enough. They are waiting for BP to say, ‘oh, we've got a new plan to stop the oil leak.’ They need to stop it, contain it, clean it up, and try to help us conserve our coastal wetlands.<ref>[http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/99375-donna-brazile-calls-obamas-oil-spill-response-not-tough-enough Donna Brazile calls Obama’s oil spill response ‘not tough enough’,] Ben Geman, ''The Hill'', 23 May 2010.</ref>}}

[[Dick Morris]], an intimate adviser to President [[Bill Clinton]] observed,
{{Cquote|these failings show that Obama is in over his head. But to the [[left]], which bleeds for each drop of water in the gulf and cries over every turtle or shrimp or sea bird, it is an unpardonable sin...Obama's incompetence and inexperience is causing [[liberal]]s to see him as arrogant, aloof, removed, conceited, suspicious of outside advice and even lazy...these character defects will haunt the president until 2012 and beyond.<ref>[http://townhall.com/columnists/DickMorrisandEileenMcGann/2010/06/19/dems_turn_on_obama?page=full&comments=true Dems Turn On Obama,] Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, 19 June 2010. Retrieved from Townhall.com 19 June 2010.</ref>}}

David Gergen worked in the [[Reagan]], [[George H.W. Bush]], and Clinton White House remarked,
{{Cquote|If our government had fought [[WWII]] like the way we’re fighting the oil spill, there’s a good chance many of us would be speaking [[German]] today.<ref>[http://www.ihatethemedia.com/david-gergen-rips-obama-oil-spill-response Another Democrat turns on Obama: David Gergen rips Obama’s oil spill response, Ihatethemedia.com, May 27, 2010]</ref>}}

[[Peggy Noonan]], a speech writer for President's Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, summed up public perceptions with,
{{Cquote|The president, in my view, continues to govern in a way that suggests he is chronically detached from the central and immediate concerns of his countrymen.... he has not, almost from the day he was inaugurated, been in sync with the [[Centrist|center]]....The American people have spent at least two years worrying that high government spending would, in the end, undo the republic. They saw the dollars gushing night and day...And now we have a videotape metaphor for all the public’s fears: the well gushing black oil into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] ...His philosophy is that it is appropriate for the federal government to occupy a more burly, significant and powerful place in America—confronting its problems of need, injustice, inequality. ... Then the oil spill came and government could not do the job, could not meet the need ...[[Hurricane Katrina|Katrina]] illustrate[d] that even though the federal government in our time has continually taken on new missions and responsibilities, the more it took on, the less it seemed capable of performing even its most essential jobs. [[Conservative]]s got this point—they know it without being told—but [[liberal]]s and [[progressive]]s did not. They thought Katrina was the result only of [[George W. Bush]]’s incompetence and conservatives’ failure to “believe in government.” But Mr. Obama was supposed to be competent....It’s not good to have a president in this position—weakened, polarizing and lacking broad public support—less than halfway through his term. That it is his fault is no comfort.<ref>[http://www.peggynoonan.com/article.php?article=524 He Was Supposed to Be Competent]: The spill is a disaster for the president and his political philosophy., Peggy Noonan, ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'', 29 May 2010.</ref>}}

''[[New York Times]]'' columnist [[Liberal_hate_speech#Against_the_disabled|Maureen Dowd]] wrote,
{{Cquote|Obama and top aides who believe in his [[divinity]] make a mistake to dismiss complaints of his aloofness as Washington white noise. He treats the press as a nuisance rather than examining his own inability to encapsulate Americans’ feelings.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/30/opinion/30dowd.html Once More, With Feeling,] Maureen Dowd, ''New York Time'' Op Ed, 29 mMay 2010.l</ref>}}

Actor Robert Redford demanded action from the [[Obama administration]]. The liberal special interest group [[Natural Resources Defense Council]] has Redford in a new ad decrying the lackluster response.<ref>[http://biggovernment.com/jmeath/2010/05/25/obamas-katrina-in-the-gulf/ Obama’s ‘Katrina’ in the Gulf, BigGovernment.com, May 25, 2010]</ref> Redford made an appearance on MSNBC and said there is no one manning this ship,
{{Cquote|In this case, we don’t need a disaster manager, we need a leader.}}

[[Hollywood values|Liberal Hollywood]] director [[James Cameron]] says;
{{cquote|Over the last few weeks I've watched, as we all have, with growing horror and heartache, watching what's happening in the Gulf and thinking those morons don't know what they're doing. <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/cameron-titanic-spill-morons/2010/06/03/id/361007 'Titanic' Director Cameron: 'Morons' Directing Spill Efforts, NewsMax, June, 2010]</ref>}}

Obnoxious Hollywood liberal [[Rosie O'Donnell]] said, "We broke the womb of freaking mother Earth." <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2010/06/08/rosie-odonnell-wants-bps-assets-seized-we-broke-freakin-womb-mother-eart Rosie O'Donnell Wants BP's Assets Seized, NewsBusters.org, June 8, 2010]</ref> In addition, O'Donnell accused BP of
{{cquote|willful homicide, willful mass murder" and demanded BP be nationalized immediately: "I say seize their assets. Right now. Seize their assets today. Take over the company.}}

===Foreign reaction===
Relations between allies the [[U.K.]] and U.S. are now at historic lows thanks to Barack Obama's mishandling of the oil spill. Britain had been repeatedly mocked by Obama prior to the spill<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/mar/06/obama-dvd-brown Obama's DVD gift to Brown - it's the thought that counts,] ''Guardian UK,'' March 6, 2009.</ref> <ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4623148/Barack-Obama-sends-bust-of-Winston-Churchill-on-its-way-back-to-Britain.html Barack Obama sends bust of Winston Churchill on its way back to Britain,] ''Telegraph UK,'' February 14, 2009.</ref> <ref>[http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/03/obama_disses_brit_pm.html Obama disses Brit PM, American Thinker,] March 5, 2009.</ref> but now find themselves subjected to endless [[propaganda]]. Prominent foreign dignitaries have expressed the public's growing frustration with the administration's posturing and hunt for scapegoats. The mayor of London, Boris Johnson, who supported Obama in 2008, decried "anti-British rhetoric, buck-passing and name-calling" while Lord Tebbit branded Mr Obama's conduct “despicable” and the president's rhetoric
{{cquote|a crude, [[bigot]]ed, [[xenophobic]] display of [[partisan]] political Presidential petulance."<ref>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1285467/BP-OIL-SPILL-Lord-Tebbit-Boris-Johnson-attack-Obamas-anti-British-rhetoric.html#ixzz0rK7zthtN</ref><ref>[http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23843524-boris-johnson-tells-barack-obama-stop-bashing-britain.do Boris Johnson tells Barack Obama: Stop bashing Britain,] London Evening Standard, June 6, 2010.</ref>}}
The atmosphere Obama created in Britain is so toxic that the British press has labelled Barack Obama the most unpopular man in England. <ref>[http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/06/17/2010-06-17_president_barack_obama_is_the_most_hated_man_in_england_says_british_reporter.html Barack Obama: the most unpopular man in Britain?,] Telegraph UK, June 17, 2010.</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|3}}

[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Disasters]]
[[Category: Environment]]

==External Links==
* [http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23oilspill Twitter Feed: #Oilspill (warning vulgar comments left)]
* [http://www.bp.com/bodycopyarticle.do?categoryId=1&contentId=7052055&nicam=USCSBaselineCrisis&nisrc=Google&nigrp=Non_Branded Official BP Global Oil Spill News Website]
* [http://dailybail.com/slideshows/bp-disaster-dying-birds/5613601 Photos of Gulf birds covered in oil]

Nolan chart

2010-07-13T15:57:06Z

ChrisGT90: Redirected page to Political Spectrum#Alternatives

#REDIRECT [[Political Spectrum#Alternatives]]

Political Spectrum

2010-07-13T15:56:19Z

ChrisGT90: /* Modern use */ Changed section heading to "Alternatives"

The idea of a '''political spectrum''' stems from deliberative bodies in which groups of like-minded men would sit on opposite sides of a chamber, which gave rise to terms like "left" and "right" being attached to the views of the men on those sides.

The earliest known left-right classification was that of the [[National Assembly]] in [[France]] just before the [[French Revolution]]. Members who supported the monarchy, would sit towards the right. Those who had been offended by their own party would frequently stand up and walk over to the other side of the hall in order to make a political statement.
__TOC__

Historian [[Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.]] has said the spectrum theory was "adequate to the political simplicities of the nineteenth century, when the Right meant those who wished to preserve the existing order and the Left meant those who wished to change it. But the twentieth century, here as elsewhere, introduced new ambiguities." <ref>[http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/50s/schlesinger-notrightleft.html Not Right, Not Left, But a Vital Center], [[Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.]], ''New York Times Magazine'', April 4, 1948.</ref> In modern times, the left emphasizes [[collectivism|collective]] wisdom as a guiding force (see [[planned economy]]), while the right emphasizes individual rights (see [[ideological spectrum]]).

This is in stark contrast to the erroneous liberal (and Communist) view which associates the "right" with Fascism and the "left" with Communism:

*The rise of fascism and communism illustrated vividly the fallacies of the linear conception of Right and Left. In certain basic respects - a totalitarian state structure, a single party, a leader, a secret police, a hatred of political, cultural and intellectual freedom - fascism and communism are clearly more like each other than they are like anything in between. [http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/50s/schlesinger-notrightleft.html]

==Definitions==

The original definition referred to Church and state issues from the late 18th century Enlightenment period. At its root was faith vs. rationalism, or the Church vs. [[secularism]]. The so-called "right", defined as "traditional interests" referred to the Church & monarchy who ruled by the [[divine right of kings]], and the so-called "left" constituted secular elements challenging the Church's long-held influence over civil government. These definitions have always been problematic when attempting to assign western notions of "left and right" to societies which traditionally have no conception of separation of church and states, such as in Islam <ref>[http://nobsopus.blogspot.com/1993/11/political-career-of-muhammad.html The Political Career of Muhammad], Arnold Toynbee, ''A Study of History'' Annex II TO III. C. (ii) (b) p. 466.</ref> or Czarist Russia.

The monarchy and titled nobility became known as the "right"; this idea however has been disabused in the United States where a landlord class of titled nobles never existed, and in fact is specifically prohibited by the U.S. Constitution. Hence Europeans today, based upon their own cultural idioms and history, have an extremely discolored view of what the "American right" is.

Another common misperception is, while the "right" has become identified with defending and advocating [[Judeo-Christian]] values, [[secular]] [[atheist]] mass movements such as [[National Socialism]] are often either mistakenly or deliberately labeled as [[right-wing]]. This fallacy has been particularly well illustrated in our own time by examining the modern [[fascist]] [[Ba'athist]] [[regime]]s of [[Iraq]] and [[Syria]]. Both have their roots in the anti-clerical influences of Western [[socialism]] against fundamentalist [[Islam]], and inherently promote "change" against oppressive religious [[theocracy]].<ref>[http://www.ozconservative.com/whatisconsshort.htm What is conservatism?]Mark Richardson</ref>

The "left" is often described as advocating "change" of traditional systems and institutions of a society, however the leftist regimes of [[Cuba]] and [[North Korea]] stoutly resist changes other leftist regimes abandoned 20 years ago after seven decades of stagnation and exploitation of the oppressed common people by a privileged leftist ruling elite.

While the left may challenge the authority, legitimacy and even existence of a supreme power, the right is beholden to traditional faith-based cultural attitudes.

==Origins==
At the time of the [[French Revolution]], when the existing order, or ''[[Ancien Regime]]'' had been overthrown, the idea of [[nationalism]] did not exist throughout most of [[Europe]]. During the violent years of 1793 and 1794 in France, a love of the ''Patrie'', or the nation, was cultivated to replace the foundations upon which [[society]] had been built under the old order. Under the stimulus of this movement for national unification, Catholicism was faced with the competition of a worship of national patriotism. [[Nationalism]] grew out of this new will to construct and shape the political community. <ref>John Hall Stewart, ''A Documentary Survey of the French Revolution'' (Macmillan, New York, 1963). </ref><ref>David A. Bell, ''The Cult of the Nation in France: Inventing Nationalism, 1680-1800'', (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001). [http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2005/is_1_37/ai_109668489]</ref>

This transmutation of a love of God to a love of "the people" as being the basis for a social and political order spread across Europe and other parts of the world during the nineteenth century. In Germany it became a recognition and consciousness of "''das volk''", later in Russia it was a dedication to the "''narodny''". By the mid-nineteenth century, Socialism as a doctrine sought to overthrow the existing order of society, the Church and aristocracy, by promoting atheism and nationalism. The basic tenet was to replace the individual's commitment to love and serve God with the individual's commitment to love and serve the collective society.

Socialism has always been [[authoritarian]] from its beginnings. It began as a reaction against the [[classical liberalism]] of the French Revolution. The French writers who laid its foundation had no doubt that their ideas could be put into practice only by a strong dictatorial government. The first of modern planners, Henri de Saint-Simon, predicted those who did not obey his proposed [[economic planning]] boards would be ‘treated as cattle.’ <ref>[http://www.iea.org.uk/files/upld-publication43pdf?.pdf ''Road to Serfdom'',] Friedrich A. Hayek, Reader's Digest Condensed Version, April 1945, pg. 39.</ref>

Nationalism can be defined as pride in one's native language and culture. Socialist theoreticians, wanting to overthrow the exisitng order, stirred up nationalist resentment among the minorities within the larger German, Russian, and Austro-Hungarian Empires. The reaction among Austrian Socialists was quite different. A solution to the problem of nationalities became policy in Austria-Hungary on two levels: territorial autonomy for territorial minorities, and "personal autonomy" for members of minorities dispersed among peoples of different languages and cultures. Minorities were to be granted the right to have their own schools and their own institutions. Many minorities realized it was better to remain subjects of the supra-national Hapsburg state than to be subordinate to repressive policies and actions of other national groups. Austrian Socialists rejected the idea of [[national liberation movement]]s and the dissolution of the Hapsburg Monarchy into independent national units. <ref name="talmon">J. L. Talmon, ''The Unique and the Universal'', Secker & Warburg, London 1965. </ref>

By the twentieth century, [[V.I. Lenin]] insisted on the right of subjugated peoples to break away from the great empires. Once the [[Bolsheviks]] were in power in Russia however, any attempt on the part of the subjugated peoples to break away from the Socialist Union of nations was considered [[counter-revolutionary]] activity. <ref name="talmon" />

[[Friedrich Hayek]] of the London School of Economics and Political Science writing in the Spring of 1933 <ref>Friedrich A. Hayek, ''Memorandum on Nazi-Socialism spring of 1933''</ref>
remarked,
{{Cquote|Nothing could be more superficial than to consider the forces which dominate the Germany of today as reactionary — in the sense that they want a return to the social and economic order of 1914. The persecution of the Marxists, and of democrats in general, tends to obscure the fundamental fact that National Socialism is a genuine socialist movement, whose leading ideas are the final fruit of the antiliberal tendencies which have been steadily gaining ground in Germany since the later part of the Bismarckian era, and which led the majority of the German intelligentsia first to "socialism of the chair" and later to Marxism in its social-democratic or communist form. <ref>[http://chronicle.com/weekly/v53/i30/30b00401.htm 'The Road to Serfdom'], The Chronicle of Higher Education, ''The Chronicle Review'', Volume 53, Issue 30, Page B4, March 30, 2007. </ref>}}

==Alternatives==
The left/right scale is a misleading way of comparing political systems. People use the left/right approach out of habit, but it leads to confusion. For example, [[fascism]] is often placed on the right and [[socialism]] on the left even though fascism and socialism have more similarities with each other than anything that falls between them. Indeed, the left/right scale is just an obsolete reference to the seating arrangement of the French Assembly in the 1790's.<ref>[http://www.lairdwilcox.com/news/nolanchart.html Beyond Left/Right] by [http://www.theadvocates.org/celebrities/marshall-fritz.html Marshall Fritz], 1987. Retrieved from lairdwilcox.com 05/25/07. </ref> In 1970, Denver advertising executive David Nolan invented the Nolan Chart to overcome the inherently illogical weakness of the outdated left/right political spectrum.<ref>[http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz-faq.html#faq02 Why did the Advocates create the World's Smallest Political Quiz?] Retrieved from theadvocates.org 06/01/07.</ref>
[[Image:Nolan-chart.svg|right|thumb|The Nolan Chart overcomes the weaknesses of the outdated Left/Right political spectrum.]]

The "economic" category includes what you do as a producer and consumer. These are your actions that can be described in money. Examples are earning a wage, buying a car, renting a motorhome.

The "civil" (or personal) category includes what you do in relationships and expressing yourself. These actions are not measured in money. Examples are the way you worship God, or don't; what books or magazines give you pleasure; your personal tradeoffs between today's fun and tomorrow's health. The Bill of Rights is aimed at your freedoms in this category.

Nolan saw how political families can be understood by the degree of individual choice they offer in these categories. You can use this improved way of mapping political thought to better understand your local, national and international political environment.

Left/liberals like personal choice in civil matters and central decision-making in economics. They want government to serve the disadvantaged and promote equality. Left/liberals place high value on good intentions. They accept diversity in social behavior but seek more equality in economics. They work with libertarians in defending civil liberties and with socialists in advancing economic central planning.

Right/conservatives like personal choice in economics and central decision-making in civil matters. They want government to defend the community from threats to its moral fiber. Right/conservatives place high value on laws and legislation. They accept diversity in economics but seek similarity in social behavior. They work with libertarians in defending economic freedoms and with populists in enforcing community standards in social matters.

Socialists and [[populist]]s favor central decision-making in both civil and economic matters. They believe the needs of the individual are subordinate to the needs of society. They want government to "correct wrongs." While they strongly differ on particular programs, both prefer equality in economic and personal matters.

Classical liberals/libertarians like personal choice in both civil and economic matters. They believe government's only purpose is to safeguard people from coercion and violence. They value individual responsibility and tolerance. Libertarians accept diversity in both social behavior and in economic situation.

Centrists favor selective governmental intervention and temporary affiliations with others. They take a strong stance on few issues, preferring the middle position in most matters. Centrists emphasize practical solutions to current public issues.

Furthermore, the old fashioned left-right model is fatally flawed. The model implies that if you "go too far" (i.e., are consistent) with any political idea, you end up, in some inexplicable way, at [[totalitarianism]] or anarchism, or maybe both. Pursue conservative thought to its logical extreme, according to this model, and you somehow end up at fascism, which is national socialism, or white supremacy or some other authoritarian position. If you pursue liberal thought too far, you supposedly end up at socialism or communism. This is inconsistent, and it ignores large philosophical differences between, liberalism and communism, and conservatism and fascism.

==Extreme Polarization==

Dacher Keltner, assistant professor of psychology at the University of California at Berkeley, has found that people have a powerful tendency to exaggerate the views of their ideological opponents, seeing, on average, twice as much difference as actually exists. Moreover, he has turned up this “imagined [[extremism]]” in a variety of settings, including conflicts over [[abortion]] rights, the interpretation of a racial incident, the attitudes of homosexuals and Christian fundamentalists and the choices of English professors toward use of the “Western Canon” in university classes.

Partisans and nonpartisans in political disputes, Keltner's study finds, seriously overestimate the polarization between the two sides. Although a tendency to demonize one’s opponents is not a new understanding, Keltner’s work breaks new ground in being able to measure the extent of the effect by gathering hard data on actual versus perceived differences among the parties to a dispute as well as among neutral observers. <ref>[http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CB4QFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.solargeneral.com%2Flibrary%2Fwatchdogs.pdf&ei=wT48TJ27OIGesQPh6OicBg&usg=AFQjCNH6klBgCEvVYd-hqyzUGyy2kBDAIA&sig2=YQgHfGz4bm2ksQ3RTWyFYQ Patricia McBroom, UC, Berkeley, News Release, 1/4/97, Political attitudes in the U.S. are exaggerated, according to UC Berkeley psychologist in studies of “Imagined Extremism.”] [http://www.solargeneral.com/library/watchdogs.pdf SolarGeneral.com; Library]</ref>

==References==
<references/>

==See also==

* [[Nomenklatura]]
* [[Political profiling]]
[[category:political Terms]]

==External links==
*[http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~garfinkm/Spectrum.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~garfinkm/Spectrum.html&h=697&w=724&sz=181&tbnid=eAv0lAZBMDi55M:&tbnh=135&tbnw=140&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dpolitical%2Bspectrum&start=2&sa=X&oi=images&ct=image&cd=2 a 2-d view] with left-right based on US politics and a novel vertical axis

Gulf of Mexico oil spill

2010-07-13T15:40:58Z

ChrisGT90: /* Deepwater Horizons */ Rig name correction

[[File:Dispersants spraying.jpg|right|300px|thumb|President Obama directed the [[United States Coast Guard]] to dump [[toxic]] disperants into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] despite known health hazards to humans and wildlife. [http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/] ]]The '''Gulf of Mexico oil spill''' began on 20 April 2010 when the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil drilling rig operated by [[BP]] (known as British Petroleum until 2000) exploded and sank.<ref>[http://www.businessinsider.com/gulf-of-mexico-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-2010-4 Here's The Questions You Should Be Asking About The Gulf Of Mexico Oil Spill]</ref> Oil began leaking at an estimated 2.5 million gallons per day, resulting in massive environmental degradation.<ref>[http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hSaoIddZwUtk-BTcIDuy6AjaHwSgD9GBV0GO0 Scientists: Oil leaking up to 2.52M gallons daily]</ref> The blowout also killed eleven workers. Despite the known [[toxic]]ity of the dispersant Corexit, the [[Obama administration]] dumped millions of gallons of the hazardous chemical into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] with C-130 aircraft provided by the [[U.S. Coast Guard]]<ref>http://vodpod.com/watch/3962219-confirmed-corexit-being-sprayed-from-coast-guard-planes</ref>and the [[Air Force]].<ref>http://bpoilslick.blogspot.com/2010/07/us-air-force-sprays-corexit-from-plane.html</ref>

On 31 March 2010 [[President Obama]] announced a plan for exploitation of offshore oil reserves during a speech at Andrews Air Force Base outside [[Washington, D.C.]]<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/user/AssociatedPress#p/u/6/mA7RAfHN-wo Obama Lifts Ban on Offshore Drilling,] ''[[Associated Press]],'' 31 March 2010. Retrieved from [[Youtube]] 9 May 2010.</ref> The President's actions have been labeled, "a decision to endanger our coastal [[ecosystem]]s with the risk of catastrophic oil spills."<ref>[http://members.greenpeace.org/blog/greenpeaceusa_blog/2010/04/30/president_obama_committed_to_endangering President Obama must reinstate moratorium on offshore drilling,] [[Greenpeace]] USA blogs, 30 Apr 2010.</ref> Defending the decision, the President remarked "oil rigs today generally don’t cause spills. They are technologically very advanced."<ref>White House Press Release, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-a-discussion-jobs-and-economy-charlotte-north-carolina Remarks by the President in a Discussion on Jobs and the Economy in Charlotte, North Carolina,] Office of the Press Secretary, April 02, 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 3 May 2010.</ref><ref>Video: [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/04/29/flashback_obama_says_oil_rigs_today_dont_generally_cause_spills.html Obama Says "Oil Rigs Today Don't Generally Cause Spills"], 2 April 2010. Retrieved from RealClearPolitics.com 12 May 2010.</ref>

Since January 2009 the [[Obama administration]] approved 346 oil drilling plans without securing permits required by law from the [[federal]] agency that assesses environmental impacts. One such approval was for the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig responsible for the loss of life and spill.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?partner=rss&emc=rss U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits,] Ian Urbina, ''New York Times'', 13 May 2010. Retrieved 28 May 2010.</ref> [[President Barack Obama]] has been widely criticized for an unprepared and bungled response, most notably from former supporters.
 
{{cquote|'''''<big>We're in charge, but BP is responsible.</big>''''' -- '''Barack Obama, news conference of 5/27/2010'''<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/27/obama-federal-government-charge-oil-spill-response/ Obama news conference, 5/27/10]</ref>}}

==The Obama plan ==
[[File:OCS Eastern Gulf of Mexico Strategy.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Map of expanded areas of offshore oil drilling authorized by President Obama on 31 March 2010.<ref>[http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/2010/04/01/obama-offshore-oil-drilling-details.htm Obama Offshore Oil Drilling Details,] 1 April 2010. Retrieved from About.com Guide to US Government Info 16 May 2010.</ref> ''Source: United States Department of Interior.'']]
Obama called for expanded development and production throughout the [[Gulf of Mexico]]. The [[Department of Interior]]'s [[Minerals Management Service]] (MMS) estimates that the Gulf of Mexico contains 36-41.5 billion barrels of oil and 161-207 trillion cubic feet of natural gas resources. According a DOI press release, Obama's plan would "expand oil and gas development and exploration" while "protecting fisheries, [[tourism]], and places off U.S. coasts that are not appropriate for development."<ref>[http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/2010_03_31_release.cfm Department of Interior Press Release,] 31 March 2010.</ref>

The ''[[Associated Press]]'' has reported on the role ex-government regulators play in [[lobby]]ing and influence; the chief of staff of the MSS's Gulf of Mexico region once stated that deep water drilling had "few or no regulations or standards."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/a-2649320~INFLUENCE_GAME__Govt_regulators_hired_by_companies.html INFLUENCE GAME: Govt regulators hired by companies,] Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010. Retrieved from examiner.com 26 May 2010.</ref> Two years later the senior official left his job in the MMS to work for BP.<ref>Ibid.</ref> During President Obama's first year in office, as BP's regulatory compliance and environmental manager, the ex-MMS official lobbied the U.S. Ocean Policy Task Force to "carefully weigh policies that may establish exclusionary zones" or "disrupt the MMS leasing program," according to a statement posted at whitehouse.gov.<ref>Influence Game, Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010.</ref> He further stated that BP wanted access to off-limit areas such as the eastern [[Gulf of Mexico]]<ref>Ibid.</ref> which President Obama approved in March 2010.

Total U.S. offshore [[crude oil]] production in 2009 was 1.7 million barrels a day, of which 1.6 million barrels a day came from the U.S. section of the Gulf of Mexico.<ref>[http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/info_glance/petroleum.html Energy Information Administration.]</ref>

According to the ''New York Times'', President Obama "said several times during his [[Barack Hussein Obama 2008 Presidential campaign|presidential campaign]] that he supported expanded offshore drilling. He noted in his [[State of the Union]] address<ref>[http://www.c-span.org/Executive/State-of-the-Union.aspx Barack Obama State of the Union Address 2010]. Retrieved from [[C-SPAN]].org 15 May 2010.</ref> in January [2010] that weaning the country from imported oil would require “tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development.”<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/science/earth/31energy.html Obama to Open Offshore Areas to Oil Drilling for First Time,] John M. Broder, ''[[New York Times]]'', March 30, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/03/obama_clears_way_for_oil_drill.html Obama clears way for oil drilling off U.S. coasts], Associated Press, March 31, 2010, Retrieved from nola.com 8 May 2010.</ref>

Nobel Laureate in Economics, Dr. [[Paul Krugman]],<ref>[http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2008/ Economics 2008.] Retrieved from Nobel.org 10 May 2010.</ref> who has been highly critical of Obama [[Obama administration corporate bailouts|economic policy]]<ref>[http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090331151429.aspx Krugman Garners Newsweek Cover for Left-Wing Criticism of [[Obamunism|Obamanomics,]] ] Julia A. Seymour, ''Business & Media Institute'', 3/31/09.</ref> in his regular ''New York Times'' column, ''Conscience of a Liberal'' wrote a piece entitled "The oil spill is Obama's fault," and stated "that’s not what I believe....The only question is what the story will be."<ref>[http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/the-oil-spill-is-obamas-fault/?src=twt&twt=NytimesKrugman The Oil Spill Is Obama’s Fault,] Paul Krugman, ''New York Times '' Op-Ed, 30 April 2010.</ref> When questioned about the Obama regulators "cozy relationship" with oil companies the president responded, "absolutely I take responsibility for that."<ref>[http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-gulf-oil-spill Remarks by President Obama on the Gulf Oil Spill,] Office of the Press Secretary, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 29 May 2010.</ref>
=== Obama administration asks Court to allow BP drilling in the Gulf of Mexico ===

Less than four months after [[President Barack Obama]] took office a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. found that the U.S. Government was unprepared for a major spill at sea, relying on an "irrational" environmental analysis of the risks of offshore drilling. The Obama administration urged the court to revisit the decision. In its arguments to the court, the Obama administration said that the loss of royalties on the oil, estimated at almost $10 billion, "may have significant financial consequences for the federal government."

Among the existing leases was the Lease Sale #206. That deal included BP's acquisition, for $34 million, of the acreage encompassing the Deep Water Horizons well.

A day after the administration's petition, the industry's main lobbying group, the American Petroleum Institute, made its own case echoing the government's arguments. "The significance of [Gulf of Mexico] activities under the five-year program cannot be overstated," the API argued.

Secretary [[Ken Salazar]] expressed confidence that problems within the [[Minerals Management Service]] that led to poor oversight of offshore drilling were resolved. In September 2009, in testimony before the House Natural Resources Committee, Salazar listed steps he had taken to make sure problems "don't occur in the future."

In [[Senate]] hearings held in mid-November 2009, Obama MMS Deputy Director Walter Cruickshank assured the Committee panel fears of containing a catastrophic blowout were misplaced, saying the U.S. had "what we believe is the most aggressive oil spill contingency planning...in the world."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704699604575342843359124882.html</ref>

=== Approval of BP's response plan ===
The [[Obama administration]] accepted and approved BP's regional oil spill response plan for the [[Gulf of Mexico]] dated 30 June 2009<ref>[http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1351 Did anyone actually read BP's oil spill response plan?] Walruses and Seals, Non-Existent Equipment Lists and Other Fanciful References, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from peer.org 19 June 2010.</ref> and covered all the company’s operations in the Gulf. The plan lists
:*“Sea Lions, Seals, Sea Otters [and] [[Walrus]]es” as “Sensitive Biological Resources” in the Gulf, suggesting that portions were cribbed from previous [[Arctic]] exploratory planning;
:* Gives a web site for a [[Japan]]ese home shopping site as the link to one of its “primary equipment providers for BP in the Gulf of Mexico Region [for] rapid deployment of spill response resources on a 24 hour, 7 days a week basis;” and
:* Directs its media spokespeople to never make “promises that [[property]], [[ecology]], or anything else will be restored to normal.”<ref>http://www.mms.gov/DeepwaterHorizon/BP_Regional_OSRP_Redactedv2.pdf</ref>

The government approved plan made no mention about tracking sub-surface oil plumes from deepwater blowouts or preventing [[disease]] ([[virus]]es, [[bacteria]], etc.) transmission to captured [[animal]]s in rehabilitation facilities.

=== British Petroleum ===
During the first 100 days of the [[Obama administration]], the Minerals Management Service ([[MMS]]) of the [[Department of the Interior]] granted a “categorical exclusion” from a detailed environmental impact statement required under [[law]]<ref>[http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/nepa/nepaeqia.htm The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.]</ref> to BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling operation, according to the ''[[Washington Post]].''<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html U.S. exempted BP's Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study,] Juliet Eilperin, ''Washington Post,'' 5 May 2010.</ref> BP's exploration plan received in the Administration's MMS field office on 23 March 2009 states "no mitigation measures other than those required by regulation and BP policy will be employed to avoid, diminish or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources." It declared any spill would have only "sub-lethal" effects on fish and marine [[mammal]]s but it was "unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities."<ref>http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/initial_exploration_plan050410.pdf</ref>

As Senator, and while running for president, [[Barack Obama]] received a total of $77,051 from BP<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/BP?view=detail&siteid=nwhwk</ref> and has taken more money from BP's [[Political Action Committee]] and individuals connected with BP over the past 20 years than any other candidate, according to [[FEC]] disclosure records.<ref>[http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0505/obama-biggest-recipient-bp-political-action-money-20-years Obama is biggest recipient of BP’s political action cash in the last 20 years,] John Byrne, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from rawstory.com 9 May 2010.</ref> Likewise, the independent watchdog Center for Responsive Politics noted, "the “top recipient of BP-related donations during the 2008 cycle was President Barack Obama himself.”<ref>Jake Tapper, Political Punch, [[ABC News]], 5 May 2010. [http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/white-house-idea-that-bp-given-special-exemption-because-of-campaign-cash-to-obama-silly-and-ridiculous.html?cid=6a00d8341c4df253ef0134807669a3970c]</ref><ref>http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/04/on-thursday-oil-giant-bp.html</ref>
[[File:Bp-obama-logo.jpg|right|225px|thumb|Obama approved drilling permits for BP without the statutory requirement to file an environmental impact assessment,<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?partner=rss&emc=rss U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits,] Ian Urbina, ''New York Times'', 13 May 2010.</ref> the handling of spills in a worst-case scenario,<ref>[http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2010/bp-exempted-05-05-2010.html Interior Department Exempted BP Drilling From Environmental Review]: In Rush to Expand Offshore Oil Drilling, Interior Secretary Salazar Abandoned Pledge to Reform
Industry-dominated Mineral Management Service. Press Release, Center for Biological Diversity, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from www.biologicaldiversity.org, 30 May 2010.</ref> and fostered a cozy relationship between government and the oil industry.<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=10745153 Govt Regulators Hired by Companies, Influence Game: Drilling regulators move from government to industry through revolving door,] Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010. Retrieved from abcnews.go.com 30 May 2010.</ref> No other candidate took more money from BP in the past two decades than Obama received in only six years.<ref>[http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html Obama biggest recipient of BP cash,] Erika Lovley, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from Politico.com 30 May 2010.</ref>]]
Talk show personality Ed Schultz of [[MSNBC]] reiterated a call for campaign finance reform as a result of Barack Obama's ties to BP and the government's response.<ref>[http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100602102656.aspx MSNBC's Schultz Draws Bizarre Connection Between Oil Spill and Campaign Finance Reform.] Alex Fitzsimmons, Media Research Center, 2 June 2010.</ref>

Transocean, owner of the Deepwater Horizons drilling rig leased to BP, was the recipient of the Obama [[Mineral Management Service]]'s, ''Safety Award for Excellence''.<ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=66303 Democratic Leader Hoyer Doesn’t Know Whether Obama Administration was Prepared for Oil Spill,] Matt Cover, CNSNews.com, May 20, 2010.</ref><ref>MMS Thought Deepwater Horizon was Award-Winningly SAFE, The Project on Government Oversight, Exposing Government Corruption, 29 April 2010.</ref> On 30 April 2010 Transocean's stock fell after [[President Obama]]’s chief strategist, [[David Axelrod]], made comments nine days into the disaster and the [[government]] raised estimates to more than fives times of what had previously been reported about how much oil was leaking into the [[Gulf of Mexico]].<ref>[http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-30/transocean-drops-after-axelrod-comments-on-drilling-update2-.html Transocean Drops After Axelrod Comments on Drilling,] Edward Klump, ''Bloomberg Business Week'', 30 April 2010. Retrieved 2 June 2010.</ref>

It has been reported in the [[finance|financial]] press that among owners of BP<ref>[http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-aims-at-bp-hits-state-pensions-2010-06-09 President Obama's ramped up rhetoric over the BP oil spill is beginning to have an effect,] ''MarketWatch, 9 June 2010.</ref> are
*New Jersey Division of Investment (51 million shares)
*California Public Employees Retirement System (36 million shares)
*Pennsylvania Public School Employees Retirement System (7.1 million shares)
*Teachers Retirement System of Alabama (4.5 million shares)
*Employees Retirement System of Texas (4.1 million shares)
*Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (1.1 million shares)
*Illinois State Board of Investment (1.1 million shares)<ref>In 1990 Barack Obama took a job with the Law Firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland ([http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/06/nation/na-obamalegal6 Obama's lawyer days: brief and not all civil rights,] Dan Morain, ''Los Angeles Times'' 2008-04-06). Allison S. Davis, a senior partner in the firm, went into business with [[Chicago]] slumlord [[Tony Rezko]]. Davis was appointed to the Illinois State Board of Investment by Governor [[Rod Blagojevich]] at Rezko's request in 2003. ([http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/644511 How reform-minded City Hall critic became a cozy insider,] Tim Novak, ''Chicago Sun-Times'', 2007-11-11).</ref>
*Indiana Public Employees' Retirement Fund (0.7 million shares)
*Washington State Investment Board (1.2 million shares)
*United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund (21.9 million shares).

BP was found [[Negligence|wilfully negligent]] during the [[Bush administration]] in a [[Texas]] refinery explosion incident, and was assessed $108 million in fines - the highest workplace safety fines in U.S. history.<ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/16/60minutes/main6490197_page5.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody Blowout: The Deepwater Horizon Disaster,] ''[[60 Minutes]]'', 16 May 2010. Retrieved from cbsnews.com, 2 June 2010.</ref>

=== Nalco and Corexit ===
[[File:Dermatitis4.jpg|right|375px|thumb|Dermatitis is one immediate health concern<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/28/bp-gulf-oil-spill-pollution Gulf oil spill is public health risk, environmental scientists warn,] Suzanne Goldenberg, ''[[Guardian (uk)]]'', 28 May 2010.</ref> of the [[Obama administration]]'s decision to use [[toxic]] substances to disperse the visibility of the spill.
[http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CB4QFjAD&url=http://www.chemie.uni-regensburg.de/Physikalische_Chemie/Kunz/student/Uebung_Formulierung/Clark_presentation.pdf&rct=j&q=photo+dermatitis+corexit&ei=qn0ITPGEM-qXlAfeo8TSAQ&usg=AFQjCNHp_FTjbxFEzZI4o9iMcapG_kFO3Q&sig2=zxmIoVnIi2vekrq3WB6ztA]Residents, cleanup workers, and tourists alike may be affected. [http://chealth.canoe.ca/channel_health_news_details.asp?news_id=31005&news_channel_id=145&channel_id=145] ]]
Nalco of Naperville, Illinois formed a joint venture with Exxon Chemical in 1994 and the company's current leadership includes several executives from BP. Nalco reported it sold in excess of $40 million to BP of its dispersant, Corexit, shortly after the [[Gulf of Mexico]] oil spill disaster.

Of 18 dispersants approved by the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA), 12 were found to be more effective on southern [[Louisiana]] crude than Corexit, EPA data show.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/business/energy-environment/13greenwire-less-toxic-dispersants-lose-out-in-bp-oil-spil-81183.html Less Toxic Dispersants Lose Out in BP Oil Spill Cleanup,]
Paul Quinlan, ''Greenwire'', May 13, 2010. Retrieved from nytimes.com 25 May 2010.</ref> Two of the 12 were found to be 100 percent effective on [[Gulf of Mexico]] crude, whereas two Corexit products rated only 56 percent and 63 percent effective.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The [[toxic]]ity of the other 12 was shown to be in some cases 10 or 20 times less than Corexit, according to the EPA.<ref>Ibid.</ref> "It's a chemical that the oil industry makes to sell to itself, basically," said Richard Charter, a senior policy adviser for Defenders of Wildlife.<ref>Ibid.</ref>

Corexit was found to be one of the most toxic dispersal agents ever developed.<ref>''Acute Aquatic Toxicity of Three Corexit Products: An Overview'', Anita George-Ares and James R. Clark. Report prepared for Exxon Biomedical Sciences.</ref> With seasonal warming of water temperature the toxicity grows. Corexit is banned in the [[United Kingdom]] due to [[environment]]al concerns.<ref>[http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/05/epa-bp-dispersants Why Is the EPA Letting BP Use Dirty Dispersants?], Kate Sheppard, ''Mother Jones'', 19 May 19 2010.</ref> The Obama EPA gave BP the green light to apply Corexit to the spill.<ref>Ibid.</ref> At the Congressional hearing investigating the Gulf oil spill disaster, [[Democratic]] Representative Jerrold Nadler of [[New York]] raised the prospect of "thousands and thousands of people getting sick or dying" as a result of the administration's sanctioned use of the dispersant.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/science/earth/28workers.html Worry About Dispersant Rises as Men in Work Crew Complain of Health Problems,] Leslie Kaufman and Elizabeth Rosenthal, ''New York Times'', 27 May 2010.</ref> Critics allege use of dispersants like Corexit are largely for cosmetic purposes. Nalco has been a frequent contributor to the campaign of Sen. [[Mary Landrieu]]<ref>http://saveourwetlands.org/index-landrieu.html/</ref> of Louisiana.<ref>http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/fec/?id=273&cycle=2007-2008</ref>

== Deepwater Horizon ==
[[File:Deepwater Horizon Fire.jpg|right|250px|thumb|Fire boat response crews battle the blazing remnants of the off shore oil rig Deepwater Horizon, April 21, 2010 (U.S. Coast Guard)]]
On [[Earth Day]] 2010, a BP-leased oil drilling rig sank to the bottom of the [[Gulf of Mexico]] two days after it exploded, creating what has been described as the "worst environmental disaster in [[American History Lectures|US history]]."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/x-33986-Political-Spin-Examiner~y2010m4d29-Worst-environmental-disaster-in-US-history-Oil-slick-in-Gulf-of-Mexico-is-set-on-fire Worst environmental disaster in US history,] Maryann Tobin, ''Examiner'', April 29, 2010.</ref> [[Secretary of the Interior]] [[Ken Salazar]] told [[CNN]] "It potentially is catastrophic," and "I think we have to prepare for the worst."<ref>[http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/gulf-oil-spill:-impossible-to-measure-impact-of-%22unprecedented-environmental-disaster%22-477603.html?tickers=BP,HAL,CAM,RIG,XLE,OIL,USO Gulf Oil Spill: Impossible to Measure Impact of "Unprecedented Environmental Disaster",] Aaron Task, May 03, 2010. Retrieved from Yahoo Finance 12 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/02/salazar-oil-spill-massive-and-a-potential-catastrophe/ Salazar: Oil spill 'massive' and a potential catastrophe,] [[CNN]], 3 May 2010.</ref>

Congressional investigators think they have identified the rigs blowout preventer as the cause of the explosion. <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703339304575240323493707434.html Congress Homes In on Rig's Blowout Preventer,] Ben Casselman and Jennifer Levitz, ''Wall Street Journal Online,'' 13 May 2010.</ref> The blowout preventer was leaking hydraulic fluid, had a dead battery,<ref>Ibid.</ref> and was inspected by the Obama [[Minerals Management Service]] (MMS) only two weeks before to the explosion<ref>White House Press Office, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/press-briefing-bp-oil-spill-gulf-coast Press Briefing on the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf Coast,] 29 April 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 12 May 2010.</ref> which killed 11 people. [[Amy Goodman]], a [[leftist]] radio talk show host, has suggested those responsible should be [[prosecute]]d for [[manslaughter]].<ref>[http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/law_order_corporate_crime_unit_20100518/ Law & Order,] Amy Goodman, 18 May 2010. Retrieved from truthdigg.com 30 May 2010.</ref>

Blowout preventers are meant to shut off the well, and the last line of defense is a set of shear rams which cut the pipe and seal off the well.<ref>Congress Homes In on Rig's Blowout Preventer, Ben Casselman and Jennifer Levitz, ''WSJ Online,'' 13 May 2010.</ref> The MMS, the [[Obama administration]] agency that regulates offshore drilling along with the Coast Guard, is supposed to require proof that shear rams are powerful enough to shut the well. Michael Saucier, MMS's regional supervisor testified before Congress that the MMS did not require BP to file a "scenario for potential blowout."<ref>Ibid.</ref> The MMS certified that BP "has the capacity to respond, to the maximum extent practicable, to a worst-case discharge, or a substantial threat of such a discharge."<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/29/gulf-oil-spill-exceeds-bp_n_556798.html</ref>

A May 2010 Inspector General's report revealed at least two MMS regulatory inspectors admitted to being under the influence of the [[illegal drug]] [[methamphetamine]] while on the job.<ref>[http://www.wusf.usf.edu/news/2010/05/25/drugs_free_football_tickets_and_porn_at_minerals_management_service Drugs, Free Football Tickets and Porn at Minerals Management Service,] 25 May 2010. Retrieved from wusf.usf.edu 26 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.tgdaily.com/business-and-law-features/49932-us-bureaucrats-smoked-crystal-meth-watched-porn-as-bp-oil-rig-blew US bureaucrats smoked crystal meth, watched porn as BP oil rig blew,] Starr Keshet, 25 May 2010. Retrieved from tgdaily.com 26 May 2010.</ref>

==Environmental disaster ==
[[File:Oil slick map.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Projections of the flow of the spill over the summer of 2010. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37497578/ns/local_news-new_york_ny/] ]]
On 29 April 2010 oil began washing ashore in Plaquemines Parish, [[Louisiana]]; four weeks later local leaders still were begging [[President Obama]] for federal assistance in responding to the disaster which was overtaking hundreds of miles of shoreline.<ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/26/gulf.oil.spill.plaquemines/index.html Plaquemines Parish president blasts federal response to oil spill,] CNN, 26 May 2010.</ref>

Crude oil has washed into marshes, estuaries and onto beaches in [[Mississippi]] and [[Alabama]]. Wildlife has been killed and efforts are underway to save oil-coated
birds. Without capping the well [[Florida]]'s Everglades may be turned into a "dead zone." Scientists expect currents to carry the oil slick to the eastern seaboard of the [[United States]], fouling beaches and estuaries like the [[Chesapeake Bay]] and fishing grounds of the Grand Banks off [[Newfoundland]].

=== Silverfish ===

Most scientists agree that Corexit 9500 will have a much larger biological effect when it reaches coastal areas teeming with wildlife.<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref> Many species are being threatened at a crucial time in their life cycle.<ref>[http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2818588720100428 FACTBOX-Possible environmental impact of Gulf oil spill,] ''[[Reuters]]'', 28 April 2010.</ref> In testing done by the U.S. [[Environmental Protection Agency]] the dispersant Corexit 9500 was found to be extremely lethal to silverfish, a benchmark [[organism]] in [[toxic]]ity testing.<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>

=== Gulf menhaden ===

Gulf menhaden are a [[specie]]s harvested mostly for fish meal and fish oil. Menhaden could be badly affected
by the spill.

=== Coral, oyster and shrimp ===

Corals, oyster and shrimp likewise are critically affected. Richard Charter, a foremost expert on marine biology and oil spills who is a senior policy advisor for Marine Programmes for Defenders of Wildlife and is chairman of the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council has said, “There is a [[chemical]] [[toxic]]ity to the dispersant compound that in many ways is worse than oil,” which "in so doing you may be more seriously damaging the ecosystem offshore.”<ref>Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic. Retreived from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref> Shrimp were found to be extremely vulnerable to the lethal effects of the chemical dispersant Corexit 9500 used by [[Obama administration]] disaster relief agencies and BP in testing done by the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA).<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>

=== Brown pelican ===
[[File:Dead birds and sea turtles.jpg|right|325px|thumb|Dead birds and sea turtles. ]]
The [[Louisiana]] state bird, the Brown Pelican, was removed from protection under the U.S. Endangered Species Act in 2009. The Obama administration approved BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling rig without the proper environmental impact assessment (EIA) required by law. The disaster occurred just as breeding season commenced.

=== Other bird species ===

Other species endangered by the oil spill are American oystercatcher and Wilson's plover.

=== Sea turtles ===

As several species of sea turtles move through the Gulf during their spring nesting season, they need to surface to breathe.

=== Toxic oil spill rain ===
A report prepared by the [[Russia]]n Ministry of Natural Resources warned that the leaking [[crude oil]] into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] is about to become the worst [[environment]]al catastrophe in all of human history, threatening the entire eastern half of [[North America]] with “total destruction.” Russian scientists based the assessment on the use of millions of gallons of the government approved chemical dispersant Corexit.

The Russian scientists outlined that Corexit, with its 2.61ppm [[toxic]]ity level, combined with the seasonal warming of Gulf of Mexico waters, the [[molecule]]s will be able to “phase transition” from their present [[liquid]] to a gaseous state allowing them to be absorbed into clouds and released as “toxic rain” upon all of Eastern North America.

The scientists warned should a [[Hurricane Katrina]] like storm form in the Gulf while tens of millions of gallons of Corexit are floating on or near the surface, the resulting “toxic rain” falling upon the North American continent could “theoretically” destroy all microbial life to any depth it reaches resulting in an “unimaginable environmental catastrophe” destroying all kinds of life forms.<ref>[http://www.eutimes.net/2010/05/toxic-oil-spill-rains-warned-could-destroy-north-america/ Toxic oil spill rains warned could destroy North America,'] EUTimes, 24 May 2010. Retrieved 3 June 2010.</ref>

== The response ==

Initially [[Department of Homeland Security]] and the [[U.S. Coast Guard]] reported on 23 April 2010 there was no leak from the sunken oil rig.<ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-04-23-deepwater-horizon_N.htm Coast Guard: No oil leaking from sunken rig,] Rick Jervis, ''[[USA TODAY]]'', 23 April 2010.</ref> The next day the [[Obama administration]] officially estimated a leak from the sunken well at 1000 barrels per day.<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/24/oil-rig-deepwater-horizon_0_n_550849.html Oil Rig, Deepwater Horizon, Leaking Into Gulf Of Mexico,] Cain Burdeau, 4 April 2010. Retrieved from the ''[[Huffington Post]],'' 15 May 2010.</ref> The ''[[Associated Press]]'' reported it took nine days after the explosion and loss of life before President Obama made his first comments on the disaster.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100509/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_gulf_oil_spill_obama_s_response Obama oil response: aggressive as crisis unfolded,] ,H. Josef Hebert and Erica Werner, ''Associated Press'', 9 May 2010. Retrieved from news.yahoo.com 2 June 2010.</ref> BP's stock fell<ref>[http://in.reuters.com/article/idINLDE63S0HR20100429 European shares turn negative; BP falls,] ''Reuters'' 29 April 2010.</ref> on news of the "the worsening oil spill" and administration estimates were raised to 5000 barrels per day.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/29/us/29spill.html Size of Spill in Gulf of Mexico Is Larger Than Thought,] Campbell Robertson and Leslie Kaufman, ''New York Times,'' 28 April 2010. Retrieved 15 May 2010.</ref> and appointed a national incident commander.<ref>http://wallstcheatsheet.com/breaking-news/a-timeline-of-the-bp-oil-spill-crisis-pics/?p=10743/</ref>

=== U.S. Government dumps toxic dispersants into the Gulf of Mexico ===
[[File:Dispersants spraying.jpg|left|300px|thumb|Aerial image of the [[United States]] [[government]]'s dumping [[toxic]] disperants into the [[Gulf of Mexico]]. ]]
''Wired Science'' reports the [[Obama administration]] disaster-relief agencies are using a toxic chemical to disperse oil in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster. Use of dispersants are said to be a public relations strategy.<ref>[http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/05/gulf-dispersants/ Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative,] Brandon Keim, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from ''Wired Science'' 15 May 2010.</ref> Secretary [[Janet Napolitano]] of the [[Department of Homeland Security]] acknowledged<ref>[http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/ Obama: Oil spill bill on BP, Chem spray to save nature,] Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Updates, 04th May 2010. Retrieved from oilspillupdates.com 29 May 2010.</ref> the U.S government was dumping toxic chemicals from [[C-130]] cargo aircraft onto the spill.<ref>[http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2010-05-02/news/os-oil-disaster-chemical-cleanup-20100502_1_dispersant-spill-crude Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix,] Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref> Jackie Savitz of the ocean-conservation group Oceana stated the use of dispersants is only slightly less horrendous than the Gulf oil spill itself. "You're basically pouring chemicals into the ocean, which is never a good thing."<ref>Ibid.</ref> According to a 2009 [[Environmental Protection Agency]] report dispersants have not been used in the United State prior to the Obama administration's approval at BP'S request "because of possible long-term environmental effects, difficulties with timely and effective application, disagreement among [[scientist]]s and research data about their environmental effects, effectiveness, and [[toxic]]ity concerns" and the effects "are still unknown."<ref>Ibid.</ref> Residents in areas close to the oil spill have reported odors and symptoms such as [[headache]]s, dizziness, [[nausea]], eye irritation, and respiratory problems.<ref>[http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/gsolomon/gulf_oil_spill_air_quality_upd.html Gulf Oil Spill Air Quality,] Gina Solomon, 24 May 2010. Retrieved from Natural Resources Defense Council Staff Blog, 3 June 2010.</ref>

=== Disregard for worker safety ===
[[File:Cleaup300.jpg|right|275px|thumb|Cleanup workers exposed to the Obama adminsitration's decision to use known [[toxic]] substances to disperse the spill. Critics allege dispersants are ineffective and largely for cosmetic purposes. ]]
The ''[[Guardian (uk)]]'' has reported the controversy over Corexit exposes the [[Obama administration]] to criticism that its scientific agencies have been too accommodating to BP's strategy. In addition to the use of Corexit, the Obama [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA) came under fire for withholding test results on the toxicity of the water close to shore.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/20/gulf-oil-spill-chemical-dispersant</ref>

The dispersant 2-BE is known to cause heath dangers to clean up workers<ref>http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/gsolomon/oil_spill_clean-up_workers_get.html</ref> and wildlife alike.<ref>[http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2010/chem_dispersants_work_at_cost Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic.] Retrieved from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref> 2-BE has been documented to cause the breakdown of [[red blood cell]]s, leading to blood in urine and feces, and can damage the kidneys, liver, spleen and [[bone marrow]] of humans – effects not included on the information sheet for workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The dispersant Corexit 9500 is associated with headaches, vomiting and reproductive problems as sides effects to clean-up workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref> Lawrence Duffy of the University of Alaska claims dispersants "are more a public relations measure than a preventive one. It has an effect on our psychology because we don't see the oil slick,"<ref>Ibid.</ref> though oil particles continue to do damage.<ref>Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix, Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref>

=== Government mismanagement of relief efforts ===

Three weeks into the disaster [[National Public Radio]] reported the [[Obama administration]]'s official figures were still grossly underestimated<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126809525 Gulf Spill May Far Exceed Official Estimates,] Richard Harris, ''National Public Radio,'' 14 May 2010.</ref> and after the first month it was finally admitted the spill was nearly three times larger than earlier thought.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/us/28flow.html Estimates Suggest Spill Is Biggest in U.S. History,] Tom Zeller, Jr., ''New York Times'', 27 May 2010.</ref>

Federal officials did not begin burning the leaking oil off the surface of the water until one full week after the rig collapsed.<ref>[http://blog.al.com/live/2010/04/burning_should_have_started_a.html Burning should have started a week ago, former NOAA official says,] Ben Raines, ''Mobile Press-Register'', 29 April 2010.</ref> Louisiana Governor [[Bobby Jindal]] criticized [[President Obama]] for his slow response.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzEntQPr9OA</ref> ''The New York Times'' castigated the [[White House]] for delays and not moving quick enough, calling the evidence "damning" and declaring the Gulf oil spill a "huge disaster whose consequences might have been minimized with swifter action" from the [[Obama administration]].<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/01/opinion/01sat1.html Unanswered Questions on the Spill,] ''New York Times'' Editorial, 30 April 2010.</ref> One month into the spill, [[Democrat]]ic stalwarts [[James Carville]],<ref>[http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2521614/posts Is James Carville racist?], 26 May 2010. Retrieved from freerepublic.com 30 May 2010.</ref> [[Chris Matthews]],<ref>http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37632.html#ixzz0om46RhGH</ref> and Donna Brazile<ref>http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/99375-donna-brazile-calls-obamas-oil-spill-response-not-tough-enough</ref> criticized the inept and bungled response to the spreading catastrophe.
[[File:Finalisttransoce.jpeg|left|250px|thumb|Chris Oynes (left) of the Mineral Management Service presents Keelan Adamson (right) of Transocean the MMS's, ''Safety Award for Excellence'' (SAFE),<ref>http://www.mms.gov/awards/SAFEcriteria.htm</ref> at the MMS National Award luncheon, 7 May 2009.<ref>http://www.beaconmag.com/gomrigteamswinmm.html</ref> ''Source: Beacon magazine'']]
The [[White House]] lacked any type of plan to combat the disaster. [[U.S. House of Representatives|House]] Democratic Majority Leader [[Steny Hoyer]] publicly admitted that the [[Obama Administration]] was ill-prepared to deal with the situation. <ref>[http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2010/04/mms-thought-deepwater-horizon-was-awardwinningly-safe.html MMS Thought Deepwater Horizon was Award-Winningly SAFE,] The Project on Government Oversight, Exposing Government Corruption, 29 April 2010.</ref> While the disaster steadily grew, Obama did not discuss the crisis at length until he appeared at a photo op at Venice, Louisiana on 3 May 2010.<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126467960 Obama Says Oil Spill Damage Could Be Unprecedented,] Scott Horsley, [[NPR]], 3 May 2010.</ref> He would order a moratorium on all future deep sea oil platforms until they determine the problems associated with the current situation. As to be expected, Obama tries to remove himself from blame saying "the system failed", this despite the fact the he heads the system. Then he pointed fingers of blame at oil companies while taking an indirect jab at the Bush administration. <ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20005039-503544.html Angry Obama Seeks to Deflect Blame for Gulf Oil Spill Crisis, CBS, May 14, 2010]</ref>
{{cquote|For too long, for a decade or more, there has been a cozy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agency that permits them to drill. It seems as if permits were too often issued based on little more than assurances of safety from the oil companies. That cannot and will not happen anymore.}}
White House spokesman [[Robert Gibbs]] did his best to put a good spin on the disaster claiming the response was "comprehensive and fast." Meanwhile, the [[Democrat]]-led Congress ordered public hearings from oil executives. President Obama blamed others saying the answers from oil executives were a "ridiculous spectacle," "You had executives of BP and Transocean and Halliburton falling over each other to point the finger of blame at somebody else." <ref>[http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/burning_rig_of_fire_VkeuMCffwTUd9IBS7gUV7K?CMP=OTC-rss&FEEDNAME=#ixzz0oWm4u9zQ New look at Gulf oil spill as cleanup continues, NYPost, May 15, 2010]</ref> As the disaster progressed and questions arose over the government's misreporting and withholding<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/bp-feds-withheld-videos-showing-massive-scope-oil/story?id=10819367 BP and Feds Withheld Videos Showing Massive Scope of Oil Spill:] Coast Guard Told Public Not to 'Fixate' On Rate of Spill While Sitting On Video, Brian Ross, Matthew York, and Avni Patel, ABC News, 3 June 2010.</ref> of information from the [[public]] about the true dimensions of the calamity, the ''[[Associated Press]]'' noted,
{{cquote|First [Obama] was going to make BP pay for the Gulf oil mess. Then he declared himself in charge. Now he's trying to find out 'whose ass to kick' and making clear he'd fire BP's chief if only he could.<ref>http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100608/D9G7C5U00.html</ref>}}

=== Assistance of foreign governments ===
Nearly two-months after the disaster took place, the Obama administration decides to utilize the assistance offered by 17 countries, the U.N and the European Union. <ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/13/AR2010061304232.html After delays, [[U.S.]] begins to tap foreign aid for gulf oil spill, WaPo, June 14, 2010]</ref> International aid offers already accepted include two skimmers and 2.6 miles (4.2 kilometers) of boom from [[Mexico]], three sets of sweeping arm systems from the Netherlands and 1.86 miles (3.0 kilometers) of boom from Canada, the State Department said. The State Department noted that it has assisted BP in directly sourcing equipment and technical experts from around the world, including from Algeria, Australia, Bahrain, [[Brazil]], [[Canada]], China, Denmark, Latvia, Norway, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, and the [[United Kingdom]]. <ref>[http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/breakingnews/view/20100615-275709/US-taps-into-foreign-assistance-for-Gulf-oil-spill US taps into foreign assistance for Gulf oil spill, Agence France-Presse, June 15, 2010]</ref>

===Public relations offensive===
Faced with declining poll numbers and a public relations calamity, [[President Obama]] took to the airwaves nearly 60 days into the spill. A ''New York Times'' Op-ed commented,
{{cquote|All we got from President Obama was a vague call for some sort of new energy policy. Plus a Gulf Coast Restoration Plan, an oil spill study commission, a reminder that the secretary of energy won a Nobel Prize in physics and 17 references to God, prayer, blessings or faith.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/opinion/17collins.html The Boring Speech Policy,] Gail Collins, ''New York Times'' Op-ed, 16 June 2010.</ref><ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2010/06/17/behar-laments-shocking-bush-obama-garofalo-slams-anti-intellectual-pr Behar Panel Sees '[[Bush]]-Like' and '[[Corporatist]]' [[Obama]], [[Janeane Garofalo|Garofalo]] Slams 'Anti-Intellectual' [[Prayer]],] Joy Behar Show, [[CNN]]. Retrieved from newsbusters.org, 20 June 2010.</ref>}}
Former speechwriter for President [[Jimmy Carter]], [[Chris Matthews]], chided the President after his address to the nation,
{{cquote|Ludicrous that he keeps saying [Secretary of Energy] [[Steven Chu|Chu]] has a [[Nobel prize]]. I'll barf if he does it one more time.<ref>[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/06/15/msnbc_trashes_obamas_address_compared_to_carter_i_dont_sense_executive_command.html MSNBC Trashes Obama's Address: Compared To Carter, "I Don't Sense Executive Command,"]. Retrieved from RealClearPolitics.com, 20 June 2010.</ref>}}

==Economic impacts==
[[File:Oilslick.png|right|275px|thumb| Oil slick map as of May 30, 2010.]]
The economic impact of the [[Gulf of Mexico]] oil drilling disaster will be large and devastating to several key industries, including fishing, tourism, and transportation.<ref>[http://www.ihsglobalinsight.com/Perspective/PerspectiveDetail18638.htm Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Gulf Coast Oil Spill,] Nariman Behravesh, 4 May 2010. Retrieved from ihsglobalinsights.com 8 May 2020.</ref>

The top commercial species in terms of value are shrimp ($367 million), menhaden ($64 million), oysters ($59 million), and blue crab ($38 million).<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Fisheries Economics of the United States, Silver Spring, MD, 2008.</ref> As of 25 May 2010, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) closed 54,096 square miles to commercial and recreational fishing.<ref>http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/deepwater_horizon_oil_spill.htm</ref> These areas are some of the richest fishing grounds in the Gulf of Mexico for major commercial species such as white shrimp, blue crab, and oysters.

===Employment in fishing===
The most immediate economic impact of the oil spill has been on the Gulf fishing<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/video/asset/fishing-industry-hammered-by-gulf-oil-spill/41612D0E-B338-464D-A15E-5885B1D227D6</ref> industry. The number of [[job]]s at stake, which includes seafood processing and related wholesale and retail, is over 200,000 with related [[economic]] activity of $5.5 billion.<ref>[http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41262.pdf Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Selected Issues for Congress,] Curry L. Hagerty and Jonathan L. Ramseur, Congressional Research Service, 27 May 2010. (pdf p. 2.).</ref>

Dockside sales in [[Louisiana]] are approximately $660 million.<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Departtment of Commerce, [http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st5/publication/econ/2008/FEUS%202008%20ALL.pdf Fisheries Economics of the United States,] Silver Spring, MD, 2008. (pdf).</ref> Loses to the Louisiana fishing could be as high as $2.5 billion.<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/story/insurers-brace-for-liability-hit-from-oil-spill-2010-05-05</ref>

===Employment in tourism===

The tourist industry employs 620,000 people who earn over $9 billion in wages in the Gulf of Mexico region. Analysts say [[Florida]] alone could lose $3 billion in tourism.<ref>[http://www.royalgazette.com/rg/Article/article.jsp?articleId=7da532730030019&sectionId=65 Insurance industry concern grows over oil spill liability,] Alistair Barr, ''Royal Press Gazette'', 6 May 2010.</ref>

In 2008, recreational anglers took 25.4 million fishing trips and spent over $12 billion on equipment and trips in the Gulf region.<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Fisheries Economics of the United States, Silver Spring, MD, 2008.</ref> Some of the most popular recreational species include snappers, several types of drum, sheepshead, and Spanish mackerel. Recreational fisheries support businesses such as charters, bait and tackle, and services such as restaurants and hotels.

In 2000, 21.9 million people visited Gulf beaches and accounted for 177.2 million beach days.<ref>Brent Ache, David Bylsma, and Kristen Crossett, et al., The Gulf of Mexico at a Glance, National Ocean Service, NOAA, A Tool for the Gulf of Mexico Alliance and the American Public, Washington, DC, 2008. [http://gulfofmexicoalliance.org/pdfs/gulf_glance_1008.pdf pdf].</ref>

===Transportation===
The Offshore Marine Service Association (OMSA),<ref>[http://www.marinelog.com/DOCS/NEWSMMIX/2010jun00034.html OMSA slams offshore drilling moratorium,] 3 June 2010. Retrieved from Marinelog.com, 19 June 2010.</ref> the national trade association for U.S. flag vessels in the energy sector, criticized the [[Obama administration]]'s moratorium on offshore drilling projects. 100,000 jobs were immediately affected by the president's decision as companies began cancelling contracts to carry supplies, forcing layoffs. "The industry has struggled to climb out of a severe economic downturn. The moratorium threatens any hope of recovery and creates the potential for economic hardship that could last a decade or longer," remarked OMSA President Ken Wells.

OMSA estimates that for every mariner who works on-board a vessel, there are nine other Americans working in shore-side jobs that support vessel operations. Beyond the vessel crew, the negative consequences of the moratorium could impact everyone from service technicians supporting everything from diesel engines to the air condition systems to the local grocer who supplies food for the boat's galley.

Offshore vessels are a major part of the tax base in many coastal communities. Gulf Coast state and local government revenues will also decrease due to lower [[income tax]] and [[sales tax]] collections.

Disruption of shipping traffic in and out of the Port of [[New Orleans]] will impact barge, container, and tanker traffic in the Mississippi Delta and along the [[Mississippi River]]. Prices of all types of commodities would affected.

=== Insurance industry ===

BP, the operator on the oil drilling lease with a 65% stake, insured itself, rather than buying coverage from insurance companies. Industry analysts estimate total costs related to the oil spill cleanup and damages could exceed $14 billion. <ref>[http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKLDE6410IJ20100502 U.S. oil spill could bill could exceed $14 billion,] Tom Bergin, ''Reuters,'' 2 May 2010.</ref>

=== Lost revenue to state and local governments ===
:'''Louisiana'''
A Greater New Orleans study indicates the [[Obama administration]]'s moratorium could cost [[Louisiana]] as many as 22,000 jobs and more than $782 million in revenues.

With the average deepwater rig employing 230 workers with an average salary of $98,000, the study puts the tax revenue impact at $151 million if drilling were to resume within 18 months. Greater New Orleans President and CEO Michael Hecht says it’s difficult to be optimistic based on President Obama’s [[Oval Office]] address on 15 June 2010. President Obama's action “has the potential to turn an ecological tragedy into an economic calamity,” Hecht said.<ref>[http://neworleanscitybusiness.com/blog/2010/06/16/study-moratorium-could-cost-up-to-22000-jobs-782m-in-lost-revenue/ Study: Moratorium could cost up to 22,000 jobs, $782M in lost revenue,] Greg LaRose, ''New Orleans City Business'', 16 June 2010.</ref> The study foresees in a worse case scenario the loss of more than 22,000 jobs, 3,450 of them directly tied to the operating rigs and 18,945 with indirect ties such as catering firms and other companies that serve U.S energy producers.

Fearing that the drilling moratorium "could exacerbate, rather than alleviate, the impacts of this spill upon both our [[economy]] and our [[environment]]," U.S. Senator [[Mary Landrieu]] wrote to President Obama on 11 June 2010.<ref>http://landrieu.senate.gov/mediacenter/pressreleases/06-11-2010-1.cfm</ref> Landrieu stated,
{{Cquote|more than 300,000 Louisianians are employed either directly or indirectly by the oil and gas industry. ..The immediate impacts to the economy are devastating enough: idling the 33 rigs currently permitted to drill in the deepwater Gulf would immediately impact [[employment]] for roughly 38,000 crewmen, deck hands, engineers, welders, ROV operators, caterers, helicopter pilots, and others who operate and service these vessels. That's like closing 12 large motor vehicle assembly plants in one state, all at once.}}

Lost state and local tax revenues will accrue at a rate between $8 million and $15 million a month. Federal royalty losses will be substantial and a significant drop in tolls collected for the Louisiana Highway 1 bridge at Leeville, the main artery to the Port Fourchon energy port is projected as well.
:'''Texas'''
The [[Texas]] state comptroller’s office reported collection of $2.3 billion in oil and natural gas production taxes in fiscal year 2009 and $4.1 billion in 2008. The tax revenue is used to repair roads and fund schools, among other state services. Although no official analysis of President Obama's decision to place a moratorium on offshore production has been compiled yet, the Texas comptroller’s office said it’s unclear how much of an impact the president's decision will have on state services. Experts warn the president's decision could threaten tens of thousands of jobs in the [[Houston]] area.<ref>[http://www.kvue.com/news/state/Deepwater-drilling-moratorium-threatens-Texas-tax-revenue-95848579.html Deepwater drilling moratorium threatens Texas' tax revenue,] Gabe Gutierrez, 8 June 2010. Retrieved from kvue.com, 20 June 2010.</ref>
:'''Alabama'''
Manufacturing jobs in [[Alabama]] are at risk as a result of [[President Obama]]'s actions, as no new orders for equipment are coming in.<ref>[http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=94652 NOIA Member Cos Feel Drilling Moratorium Impacts,] National Ocean Industries Association, 11 June 2010.</ref>

=== Increased dependency on foreign oil ===

[[New Jersey]] Democrat Senator [[Robert Menendez]] proposed a ban on new offshore drilling permits and submitted a bill that would retroactively raise the financial liability of BP from $75 million to $10 billion. <ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/05/senator-menendez-on-oil-spill-no-new-drilling-permits.html Senator Menendez on Oil Spill: No New Drilling Permits, ABCNews, May 12, 2010]</ref> Oklahoma [[Republican]] Senator [[James Inhofe]] successfully killed the bill saying it would reduce competition and shut down smaller independent oil companies in favor of larger companies.

=== Too big to fail ===
An oil industry trade publication<ref>[http://oilprice.com/Environment/Oil-Spills/The-Cover-up-BP-s-Crude-Politics-and-the-Looming-Environmental-Mega-Disaster.html The Cover-up: BP's Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster,] Wayne Madsen, 06 May 2010. Retrieved from oilprice.com 6 June 2010.</ref> reports [[President Obama]] and senior White House staff, as well as Interior Secretary [[Ken Salazar]], are working with BP on [[legislation]] that would raise the cap on [[liability]] for damage claims from those affected by the oil disaster from $75 million to $10 billion. However the disaster has the real potential of costing nearly $1 trillion. Critics point out that in the deal between Obama and BP, $10 billion is a drop in the bucket for a trillion dollar disaster. Talk is noted in government circles, including [[FEMA]], of the need to nationalize BP in order to compensate those who will ultimately be affected by the worst oil disaster in the history of the world, and BP would, if its assets were nationalized, be credited with almost a trillion dollars for compensation purposes.<ref>[http://www.infowars.com/the-cover-up-bps-crude-politics-and-the-looming-environmental-mega-disaster-2/ The Cover-up: BP's Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster,] Wayne Madsen, 06 May 2010. Retrieved from infowars.com 6 June 2010.</ref><ref>[http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/31/why_obama_should_put_bp_under_temporary_receiversh/ Why Obama Should Put BP Under Temporary Receivership,] [[Obama_doublespeak#Change|Robert Reich]], 31 May 2010. Retrieved from talkingpointsmemo.com, 6 June 2010.</ref>

After Obama charged [[Attorney General]] [[Eric Holder]] to investigate the disaster, BP establish a $20 billion extrajudicial fund managed by an Obama appointee.<ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37574 Obama's Latest Shakedown,] David Limbaugh, ''Human Events'', 06/20/2010.</ref> Former [[CNN]] news writer and radio talk show host Mike Malloy suggested Holder is beholden to [[corporatist]] interests.<ref>[http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100603042451.aspx The AG vs. BP: Little Skepticism on ABC and NBC, While Lefty Talker Blasts Holder as 'Corporatist' Pretender], Rich Noyes, Media Research Center, 3 June 2010.</ref>
[[File:Energy Tax bill.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Estimated impact of Obama Energy Tax in job losses. Total job loss: 2.2 million. ''Source: National Black Chamber of Commerce'' [http://www.nationalbcc.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=750:nbcc-study-generates-concerns-about-waxmanmarkey-climate-change-bill-costs-are-high-but-benefits-are-uncertain&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=7] ]]
== Revitalizing the cap and trade energy tax ==
:''Main article:'' '''[[Cap and trade]]'''
[[President Obama]] has been roundly criticized by [[Democrat]]s and [[Republican]]s alike for attempting to use the [[nation]]al tragedy to revitalized his failed Cap and Trade energy proposals. The Obama proposal, widely perceived as a job-killer tax increase, has stalled in the [[U.S. Senate]]. [[California]] Senator [[Dianne Feinstein]] has stated the climate bill "isn't going to stop the oil leak."<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/15/obamas-pitch-energy-speech-gulf-crisis-infuriates-republicans/ Obama Draws Bipartisan Criticism for Using Oil Spill to Push Energy Policy,] [[FOXNews]].com, 16 June 2010.</ref>

[[Environmentalist]]s want the President to push the program. Fred Krupp of the Environmental Defense Fund calls the opportunity "a political moment" to pass a carbon tax estimated to cost the average U.S. household $4300 per year.<ref>[http://blog.heritage.org/2009/05/15/the-4300-energy-tax/ The $4300 Energy Tax,] Nicolas Loris, 15 May 2009. Retrieved from Heritage.org, 19 June 2010.</ref>

Joel Benenson, who conducted polling for Obama’s presidential campaign, thinks the tax increase could pass, but wary Senate Democrats say otherwise. “There’s not a great call for it" said [[West Virginia]] Democratic Senator [[Jay Rockefeller]]. “It’s unrelated” to the immediate crisis in the Gulf noted Senator [[Ben Nelson]], Democrat from [[Nebraska]].<ref>[http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-16/democrats-say-climate-bill-lacks-momentum-after-spill-update3-.html Democrats Say Climate Bill Lacks Momentum After Spill,] Lisa Lerer and Simon Lomax, ''Bloomberg'', 16 June 2010. </ref>

== Criticism of the Obama administration's handling of the disaster ==
[[File:Memorial for oil workers.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Memorial service for the 11 workers killed in the explosion. ''Reuters'' [http://www.daylife.com/photo/00nya1C9URdAy?q=Mississippi] ]]
Former top adviser to President [[Bill Clinton]], [[James Carville]], turned visibly emotional in a interview with [[George Stephanopoulos]] on [[ABC]]'s ''[[Good Morning America]]'' over [[President Barack Obama]]'s "lackadaisical" response to the Gulf oil spill disaster.
{{Cquote|The political [[stupid]]ity is unbelievable. ... The President of the United States could have come down here. He could have been involved with the families of these 11 people...... He could have implemented a plan in anticipation of this... He could be commandeering tankers and making BP bring tankers in and clean this up.... He could be deploying people to the coast. He could be with the corps of engineers and the Coast Guard with these people in Plaquemines Parish, doing something about these regulations. These people are crying. They're begging for something down here. And it just looks like he's not involved in this! Man, you have got to get down here and take control of this! Put somebody in charge of this and get this thing moving! We're about to die down here!<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/bp-oil-spill-political-headache-obama-democrats-slam/story?id=10746519 'Political Stupidity': Democrat James Carville Slams Obama's Response to BP Oil Spill; Democratic Strategist Said White House Should've Acted Quickly: 'We're About to Die Down Here',] Jake Tapper and Huma Khan, ''Good Morning America,'' 26 May 2010. Retrieved from abcnews.go.com 28 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0526/unhinged-carville-obama-gulf/ Unhinged Carville goes off on Obama on oil spill, The Raw Story, May 26, 2010]</ref><ref>http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasalert/2010/20100526121155.aspx</ref>}}
Carville also said in a separate interview on [[CNN]] with [[Anderson Cooper]],
{{Cquote|They are risking everything by this ‘go along with BP’ strategy they have. They seem, like, lackadaisical on this...they seem like they’re inconvenienced by this, this is some giant thing getting in their way and somehow or another, if you let BP handle it, it’ll all go away. It’s not going away. It’s growing out there. It is a disaster of the first magnitude...the government thinks that they are partnering with BP. I think they actually believe that BP has some kind of a good motivation here. That’s one of the, sort of, whole flaws is they're naïve.<ref>[http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1005/23/sotu.01.html State of the Union with Candy Crowley,] CNN, 23 May 2010. Retrieved 20 May 2010.</ref><ref>http://www.mediaite.com/tv/james-carville-obama-administration-seems-inconvenienced-by-bp-oil-spill/</ref>}}
Obama acknowledged the criticism days later in a televised press conference:
{{Cquote|Where I was wrong was in my belief that the oil companies had their act together when it came to worst-case scenarios.<ref>Remarks by President Obama on the Gulf Oil Spill, Office of the Press Secretary, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 29 May 2010.</ref>}}
[[File:Day12 comedyskit1.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Day 12 of the Disaster: Obama enjoys an evening of levity and banter with the Washington Press Corps at the White House Correspondent's Dinner.]]
[[MSNBC]] talk show host [[Chris Matthews]]<ref>Matthews said of Obama during the Potomac Primaries, "it's part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama's speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often." [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/13/chris-matthews-i-felt-thi_n_86449.html]</ref> said on [[Jay Leno]]'s ''Tonight Show'',
{{Cquote|The president scares me. He's been acting a little like a Vatican Observer here. When is he actually going to do something? And I worry. I know he doesn't want to take ownership of it. I know politics. He said the minute he says, 'I'm in charge,' he takes the blame.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100524/pl_ynews/ynews_pl2219 White House seeks to fend off growing chorus of critics on handling of Gulf spill,] ''Yahoo News'', 24 May 2010. Retrieved 30 May 2010.</ref>}}

[[Secretary of State]] [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]'s presidential campaign manager in 2008 questioned if [[Democratic]] primary [[voter]]s had
{{Cquote|underestimated the value of experience and crisis management as important attributes for their president.<ref>[http://topics.npr.org/article/04M3gpJa4p92Z?q=NPR Did 2008 Democratic primary voters underestimate value of experience?] Alex Pappas, ''The Daily Caller'', 06/06/10. Retrieved from npr.org, 6 June 2010.</ref>}}

Donna Brazile, who managed the presidential campaign of Democratic [[candidate]] [[Al Gore]] in 2000 said on [[ABC]]'s ''[[This Week]]'',
{{Cquote|One of the problems I have with the administration is that they're not tough enough. They are waiting for BP to say, ‘oh, we've got a new plan to stop the oil leak.’ They need to stop it, contain it, clean it up, and try to help us conserve our coastal wetlands.<ref>[http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/99375-donna-brazile-calls-obamas-oil-spill-response-not-tough-enough Donna Brazile calls Obama’s oil spill response ‘not tough enough’,] Ben Geman, ''The Hill'', 23 May 2010.</ref>}}

[[Dick Morris]], an intimate adviser to President [[Bill Clinton]] observed,
{{Cquote|these failings show that Obama is in over his head. But to the [[left]], which bleeds for each drop of water in the gulf and cries over every turtle or shrimp or sea bird, it is an unpardonable sin...Obama's incompetence and inexperience is causing [[liberal]]s to see him as arrogant, aloof, removed, conceited, suspicious of outside advice and even lazy...these character defects will haunt the president until 2012 and beyond.<ref>[http://townhall.com/columnists/DickMorrisandEileenMcGann/2010/06/19/dems_turn_on_obama?page=full&comments=true Dems Turn On Obama,] Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, 19 June 2010. Retrieved from Townhall.com 19 June 2010.</ref>}}

David Gergen worked in the [[Reagan]], [[George H.W. Bush]], and Clinton White House remarked,
{{Cquote|If our government had fought [[WWII]] like the way we’re fighting the oil spill, there’s a good chance many of us would be speaking [[German]] today.<ref>[http://www.ihatethemedia.com/david-gergen-rips-obama-oil-spill-response Another Democrat turns on Obama: David Gergen rips Obama’s oil spill response, Ihatethemedia.com, May 27, 2010]</ref>}}

[[Peggy Noonan]], a speech writer for President's Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, summed up public perceptions with,
{{Cquote|The president, in my view, continues to govern in a way that suggests he is chronically detached from the central and immediate concerns of his countrymen.... he has not, almost from the day he was inaugurated, been in sync with the [[Centrist|center]]....The American people have spent at least two years worrying that high government spending would, in the end, undo the republic. They saw the dollars gushing night and day...And now we have a videotape metaphor for all the public’s fears: the well gushing black oil into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] ...His philosophy is that it is appropriate for the federal government to occupy a more burly, significant and powerful place in America—confronting its problems of need, injustice, inequality. ... Then the oil spill came and government could not do the job, could not meet the need ...[[Hurricane Katrina|Katrina]] illustrate[d] that even though the federal government in our time has continually taken on new missions and responsibilities, the more it took on, the less it seemed capable of performing even its most essential jobs. [[Conservative]]s got this point—they know it without being told—but [[liberal]]s and [[progressive]]s did not. They thought Katrina was the result only of [[George W. Bush]]’s incompetence and conservatives’ failure to “believe in government.” But Mr. Obama was supposed to be competent....It’s not good to have a president in this position—weakened, polarizing and lacking broad public support—less than halfway through his term. That it is his fault is no comfort.<ref>[http://www.peggynoonan.com/article.php?article=524 He Was Supposed to Be Competent]: The spill is a disaster for the president and his political philosophy., Peggy Noonan, ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'', 29 May 2010.</ref>}}

''[[New York Times]]'' columnist [[Liberal_hate_speech#Against_the_disabled|Maureen Dowd]] wrote,
{{Cquote|Obama and top aides who believe in his [[divinity]] make a mistake to dismiss complaints of his aloofness as Washington white noise. He treats the press as a nuisance rather than examining his own inability to encapsulate Americans’ feelings.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/30/opinion/30dowd.html Once More, With Feeling,] Maureen Dowd, ''New York Time'' Op Ed, 29 mMay 2010.l</ref>}}

Actor Robert Redford demanded action from the [[Obama administration]]. The liberal special interest group [[Natural Resources Defense Council]] has Redford in a new ad decrying the lackluster response.<ref>[http://biggovernment.com/jmeath/2010/05/25/obamas-katrina-in-the-gulf/ Obama’s ‘Katrina’ in the Gulf, BigGovernment.com, May 25, 2010]</ref> Redford made an appearance on MSNBC and said there is no one manning this ship,
{{Cquote|In this case, we don’t need a disaster manager, we need a leader.}}

[[Hollywood values|Liberal Hollywood]] director [[James Cameron]] says;
{{cquote|Over the last few weeks I've watched, as we all have, with growing horror and heartache, watching what's happening in the Gulf and thinking those morons don't know what they're doing. <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/cameron-titanic-spill-morons/2010/06/03/id/361007 'Titanic' Director Cameron: 'Morons' Directing Spill Efforts, NewsMax, June, 2010]</ref>}}

Obnoxious Hollywood liberal [[Rosie O'Donnell]] said, "We broke the womb of freaking mother Earth." <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2010/06/08/rosie-odonnell-wants-bps-assets-seized-we-broke-freakin-womb-mother-eart Rosie O'Donnell Wants BP's Assets Seized, NewsBusters.org, June 8, 2010]</ref> In addition, O'Donnell accused BP of
{{cquote|willful homicide, willful mass murder" and demanded BP be nationalized immediately: "I say seize their assets. Right now. Seize their assets today. Take over the company.}}

===Foreign reaction===
Relations between allies the [[U.K.]] and U.S. are now at historic lows thanks to Barack Obama's mishandling of the oil spill. Britain had been repeatedly mocked by Obama prior to the spill<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/mar/06/obama-dvd-brown Obama's DVD gift to Brown - it's the thought that counts,] ''Guardian UK,'' March 6, 2009.</ref> <ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4623148/Barack-Obama-sends-bust-of-Winston-Churchill-on-its-way-back-to-Britain.html Barack Obama sends bust of Winston Churchill on its way back to Britain,] ''Telegraph UK,'' February 14, 2009.</ref> <ref>[http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/03/obama_disses_brit_pm.html Obama disses Brit PM, American Thinker,] March 5, 2009.</ref> but now find themselves subjected to endless [[propaganda]]. Prominent foreign dignitaries have expressed the public's growing frustration with the administration's posturing and hunt for scapegoats. The mayor of London, Boris Johnson, who supported Obama in 2008, decried "anti-British rhetoric, buck-passing and name-calling" while Lord Tebbit branded Mr Obama's conduct “despicable” and the president's rhetoric
{{cquote|a crude, [[bigot]]ed, [[xenophobic]] display of [[partisan]] political Presidential petulance."<ref>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1285467/BP-OIL-SPILL-Lord-Tebbit-Boris-Johnson-attack-Obamas-anti-British-rhetoric.html#ixzz0rK7zthtN</ref><ref>[http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23843524-boris-johnson-tells-barack-obama-stop-bashing-britain.do Boris Johnson tells Barack Obama: Stop bashing Britain,] London Evening Standard, June 6, 2010.</ref>}}
The atmosphere Obama created in Britain is so toxic that the British press has labelled Barack Obama the most unpopular man in England. <ref>[http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/06/17/2010-06-17_president_barack_obama_is_the_most_hated_man_in_england_says_british_reporter.html Barack Obama: the most unpopular man in Britain?,] Telegraph UK, June 17, 2010.</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|3}}

[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Disasters]]
[[Category: Environment]]

==External Links==
* [http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23oilspill Twitter Feed: #Oilspill (warning vulgar comments left)]
* [http://www.bp.com/bodycopyarticle.do?categoryId=1&contentId=7052055&nicam=USCSBaselineCrisis&nisrc=Google&nigrp=Non_Branded Official BP Global Oil Spill News Website]
* [http://dailybail.com/slideshows/bp-disaster-dying-birds/5613601 Photos of Gulf birds covered in oil]

Gulf of Mexico oil spill

2010-07-13T15:39:34Z

ChrisGT90: Changed intro to read "an estimated rate of 2.5 gallons" for the sake of readability. Saying "later estimated to be..." makes it sound like the estimate was made after the spill stopped.

[[File:Dispersants spraying.jpg|right|300px|thumb|President Obama directed the [[United States Coast Guard]] to dump [[toxic]] disperants into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] despite known health hazards to humans and wildlife. [http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/] ]]The '''Gulf of Mexico oil spill''' began on 20 April 2010 when the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil drilling rig operated by [[BP]] (known as British Petroleum until 2000) exploded and sank.<ref>[http://www.businessinsider.com/gulf-of-mexico-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-2010-4 Here's The Questions You Should Be Asking About The Gulf Of Mexico Oil Spill]</ref> Oil began leaking at an estimated 2.5 million gallons per day, resulting in massive environmental degradation.<ref>[http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hSaoIddZwUtk-BTcIDuy6AjaHwSgD9GBV0GO0 Scientists: Oil leaking up to 2.52M gallons daily]</ref> The blowout also killed eleven workers. Despite the known [[toxic]]ity of the dispersant Corexit, the [[Obama administration]] dumped millions of gallons of the hazardous chemical into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] with C-130 aircraft provided by the [[U.S. Coast Guard]]<ref>http://vodpod.com/watch/3962219-confirmed-corexit-being-sprayed-from-coast-guard-planes</ref>and the [[Air Force]].<ref>http://bpoilslick.blogspot.com/2010/07/us-air-force-sprays-corexit-from-plane.html</ref>

On 31 March 2010 [[President Obama]] announced a plan for exploitation of offshore oil reserves during a speech at Andrews Air Force Base outside [[Washington, D.C.]]<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/user/AssociatedPress#p/u/6/mA7RAfHN-wo Obama Lifts Ban on Offshore Drilling,] ''[[Associated Press]],'' 31 March 2010. Retrieved from [[Youtube]] 9 May 2010.</ref> The President's actions have been labeled, "a decision to endanger our coastal [[ecosystem]]s with the risk of catastrophic oil spills."<ref>[http://members.greenpeace.org/blog/greenpeaceusa_blog/2010/04/30/president_obama_committed_to_endangering President Obama must reinstate moratorium on offshore drilling,] [[Greenpeace]] USA blogs, 30 Apr 2010.</ref> Defending the decision, the President remarked "oil rigs today generally don’t cause spills. They are technologically very advanced."<ref>White House Press Release, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-a-discussion-jobs-and-economy-charlotte-north-carolina Remarks by the President in a Discussion on Jobs and the Economy in Charlotte, North Carolina,] Office of the Press Secretary, April 02, 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 3 May 2010.</ref><ref>Video: [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/04/29/flashback_obama_says_oil_rigs_today_dont_generally_cause_spills.html Obama Says "Oil Rigs Today Don't Generally Cause Spills"], 2 April 2010. Retrieved from RealClearPolitics.com 12 May 2010.</ref>

Since January 2009 the [[Obama administration]] approved 346 oil drilling plans without securing permits required by law from the [[federal]] agency that assesses environmental impacts. One such approval was for the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig responsible for the loss of life and spill.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?partner=rss&emc=rss U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits,] Ian Urbina, ''New York Times'', 13 May 2010. Retrieved 28 May 2010.</ref> [[President Barack Obama]] has been widely criticized for an unprepared and bungled response, most notably from former supporters.
 
{{cquote|'''''<big>We're in charge, but BP is responsible.</big>''''' -- '''Barack Obama, news conference of 5/27/2010'''<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/27/obama-federal-government-charge-oil-spill-response/ Obama news conference, 5/27/10]</ref>}}

==The Obama plan ==
[[File:OCS Eastern Gulf of Mexico Strategy.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Map of expanded areas of offshore oil drilling authorized by President Obama on 31 March 2010.<ref>[http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/2010/04/01/obama-offshore-oil-drilling-details.htm Obama Offshore Oil Drilling Details,] 1 April 2010. Retrieved from About.com Guide to US Government Info 16 May 2010.</ref> ''Source: United States Department of Interior.'']]
Obama called for expanded development and production throughout the [[Gulf of Mexico]]. The [[Department of Interior]]'s [[Minerals Management Service]] (MMS) estimates that the Gulf of Mexico contains 36-41.5 billion barrels of oil and 161-207 trillion cubic feet of natural gas resources. According a DOI press release, Obama's plan would "expand oil and gas development and exploration" while "protecting fisheries, [[tourism]], and places off U.S. coasts that are not appropriate for development."<ref>[http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/2010_03_31_release.cfm Department of Interior Press Release,] 31 March 2010.</ref>

The ''[[Associated Press]]'' has reported on the role ex-government regulators play in [[lobby]]ing and influence; the chief of staff of the MSS's Gulf of Mexico region once stated that deep water drilling had "few or no regulations or standards."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/a-2649320~INFLUENCE_GAME__Govt_regulators_hired_by_companies.html INFLUENCE GAME: Govt regulators hired by companies,] Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010. Retrieved from examiner.com 26 May 2010.</ref> Two years later the senior official left his job in the MMS to work for BP.<ref>Ibid.</ref> During President Obama's first year in office, as BP's regulatory compliance and environmental manager, the ex-MMS official lobbied the U.S. Ocean Policy Task Force to "carefully weigh policies that may establish exclusionary zones" or "disrupt the MMS leasing program," according to a statement posted at whitehouse.gov.<ref>Influence Game, Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010.</ref> He further stated that BP wanted access to off-limit areas such as the eastern [[Gulf of Mexico]]<ref>Ibid.</ref> which President Obama approved in March 2010.

Total U.S. offshore [[crude oil]] production in 2009 was 1.7 million barrels a day, of which 1.6 million barrels a day came from the U.S. section of the Gulf of Mexico.<ref>[http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/info_glance/petroleum.html Energy Information Administration.]</ref>

According to the ''New York Times'', President Obama "said several times during his [[Barack Hussein Obama 2008 Presidential campaign|presidential campaign]] that he supported expanded offshore drilling. He noted in his [[State of the Union]] address<ref>[http://www.c-span.org/Executive/State-of-the-Union.aspx Barack Obama State of the Union Address 2010]. Retrieved from [[C-SPAN]].org 15 May 2010.</ref> in January [2010] that weaning the country from imported oil would require “tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development.”<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/science/earth/31energy.html Obama to Open Offshore Areas to Oil Drilling for First Time,] John M. Broder, ''[[New York Times]]'', March 30, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/03/obama_clears_way_for_oil_drill.html Obama clears way for oil drilling off U.S. coasts], Associated Press, March 31, 2010, Retrieved from nola.com 8 May 2010.</ref>

Nobel Laureate in Economics, Dr. [[Paul Krugman]],<ref>[http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2008/ Economics 2008.] Retrieved from Nobel.org 10 May 2010.</ref> who has been highly critical of Obama [[Obama administration corporate bailouts|economic policy]]<ref>[http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090331151429.aspx Krugman Garners Newsweek Cover for Left-Wing Criticism of [[Obamunism|Obamanomics,]] ] Julia A. Seymour, ''Business & Media Institute'', 3/31/09.</ref> in his regular ''New York Times'' column, ''Conscience of a Liberal'' wrote a piece entitled "The oil spill is Obama's fault," and stated "that’s not what I believe....The only question is what the story will be."<ref>[http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/the-oil-spill-is-obamas-fault/?src=twt&twt=NytimesKrugman The Oil Spill Is Obama’s Fault,] Paul Krugman, ''New York Times '' Op-Ed, 30 April 2010.</ref> When questioned about the Obama regulators "cozy relationship" with oil companies the president responded, "absolutely I take responsibility for that."<ref>[http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-gulf-oil-spill Remarks by President Obama on the Gulf Oil Spill,] Office of the Press Secretary, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 29 May 2010.</ref>
=== Obama administration asks Court to allow BP drilling in the Gulf of Mexico ===

Less than four months after [[President Barack Obama]] took office a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. found that the U.S. Government was unprepared for a major spill at sea, relying on an "irrational" environmental analysis of the risks of offshore drilling. The Obama administration urged the court to revisit the decision. In its arguments to the court, the Obama administration said that the loss of royalties on the oil, estimated at almost $10 billion, "may have significant financial consequences for the federal government."

Among the existing leases was the Lease Sale #206. That deal included BP's acquisition, for $34 million, of the acreage encompassing the Deep Water Horizons well.

A day after the administration's petition, the industry's main lobbying group, the American Petroleum Institute, made its own case echoing the government's arguments. "The significance of [Gulf of Mexico] activities under the five-year program cannot be overstated," the API argued.

Secretary [[Ken Salazar]] expressed confidence that problems within the [[Minerals Management Service]] that led to poor oversight of offshore drilling were resolved. In September 2009, in testimony before the House Natural Resources Committee, Salazar listed steps he had taken to make sure problems "don't occur in the future."

In [[Senate]] hearings held in mid-November 2009, Obama MMS Deputy Director Walter Cruickshank assured the Committee panel fears of containing a catastrophic blowout were misplaced, saying the U.S. had "what we believe is the most aggressive oil spill contingency planning...in the world."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704699604575342843359124882.html</ref>

=== Approval of BP's response plan ===
The [[Obama administration]] accepted and approved BP's regional oil spill response plan for the [[Gulf of Mexico]] dated 30 June 2009<ref>[http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1351 Did anyone actually read BP's oil spill response plan?] Walruses and Seals, Non-Existent Equipment Lists and Other Fanciful References, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from peer.org 19 June 2010.</ref> and covered all the company’s operations in the Gulf. The plan lists
:*“Sea Lions, Seals, Sea Otters [and] [[Walrus]]es” as “Sensitive Biological Resources” in the Gulf, suggesting that portions were cribbed from previous [[Arctic]] exploratory planning;
:* Gives a web site for a [[Japan]]ese home shopping site as the link to one of its “primary equipment providers for BP in the Gulf of Mexico Region [for] rapid deployment of spill response resources on a 24 hour, 7 days a week basis;” and
:* Directs its media spokespeople to never make “promises that [[property]], [[ecology]], or anything else will be restored to normal.”<ref>http://www.mms.gov/DeepwaterHorizon/BP_Regional_OSRP_Redactedv2.pdf</ref>

The government approved plan made no mention about tracking sub-surface oil plumes from deepwater blowouts or preventing [[disease]] ([[virus]]es, [[bacteria]], etc.) transmission to captured [[animal]]s in rehabilitation facilities.

=== British Petroleum ===
During the first 100 days of the [[Obama administration]], the Minerals Management Service ([[MMS]]) of the [[Department of the Interior]] granted a “categorical exclusion” from a detailed environmental impact statement required under [[law]]<ref>[http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/nepa/nepaeqia.htm The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.]</ref> to BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling operation, according to the ''[[Washington Post]].''<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html U.S. exempted BP's Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study,] Juliet Eilperin, ''Washington Post,'' 5 May 2010.</ref> BP's exploration plan received in the Administration's MMS field office on 23 March 2009 states "no mitigation measures other than those required by regulation and BP policy will be employed to avoid, diminish or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources." It declared any spill would have only "sub-lethal" effects on fish and marine [[mammal]]s but it was "unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities."<ref>http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/initial_exploration_plan050410.pdf</ref>

As Senator, and while running for president, [[Barack Obama]] received a total of $77,051 from BP<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/BP?view=detail&siteid=nwhwk</ref> and has taken more money from BP's [[Political Action Committee]] and individuals connected with BP over the past 20 years than any other candidate, according to [[FEC]] disclosure records.<ref>[http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0505/obama-biggest-recipient-bp-political-action-money-20-years Obama is biggest recipient of BP’s political action cash in the last 20 years,] John Byrne, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from rawstory.com 9 May 2010.</ref> Likewise, the independent watchdog Center for Responsive Politics noted, "the “top recipient of BP-related donations during the 2008 cycle was President Barack Obama himself.”<ref>Jake Tapper, Political Punch, [[ABC News]], 5 May 2010. [http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/white-house-idea-that-bp-given-special-exemption-because-of-campaign-cash-to-obama-silly-and-ridiculous.html?cid=6a00d8341c4df253ef0134807669a3970c]</ref><ref>http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/04/on-thursday-oil-giant-bp.html</ref>
[[File:Bp-obama-logo.jpg|right|225px|thumb|Obama approved drilling permits for BP without the statutory requirement to file an environmental impact assessment,<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?partner=rss&emc=rss U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits,] Ian Urbina, ''New York Times'', 13 May 2010.</ref> the handling of spills in a worst-case scenario,<ref>[http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2010/bp-exempted-05-05-2010.html Interior Department Exempted BP Drilling From Environmental Review]: In Rush to Expand Offshore Oil Drilling, Interior Secretary Salazar Abandoned Pledge to Reform
Industry-dominated Mineral Management Service. Press Release, Center for Biological Diversity, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from www.biologicaldiversity.org, 30 May 2010.</ref> and fostered a cozy relationship between government and the oil industry.<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=10745153 Govt Regulators Hired by Companies, Influence Game: Drilling regulators move from government to industry through revolving door,] Frederic J. Frommer, ''Associated Press'', 26 May 2010. Retrieved from abcnews.go.com 30 May 2010.</ref> No other candidate took more money from BP in the past two decades than Obama received in only six years.<ref>[http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html Obama biggest recipient of BP cash,] Erika Lovley, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from Politico.com 30 May 2010.</ref>]]
Talk show personality Ed Schultz of [[MSNBC]] reiterated a call for campaign finance reform as a result of Barack Obama's ties to BP and the government's response.<ref>[http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100602102656.aspx MSNBC's Schultz Draws Bizarre Connection Between Oil Spill and Campaign Finance Reform.] Alex Fitzsimmons, Media Research Center, 2 June 2010.</ref>

Transocean, owner of the Deepwater Horizons drilling rig leased to BP, was the recipient of the Obama [[Mineral Management Service]]'s, ''Safety Award for Excellence''.<ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=66303 Democratic Leader Hoyer Doesn’t Know Whether Obama Administration was Prepared for Oil Spill,] Matt Cover, CNSNews.com, May 20, 2010.</ref><ref>MMS Thought Deepwater Horizon was Award-Winningly SAFE, The Project on Government Oversight, Exposing Government Corruption, 29 April 2010.</ref> On 30 April 2010 Transocean's stock fell after [[President Obama]]’s chief strategist, [[David Axelrod]], made comments nine days into the disaster and the [[government]] raised estimates to more than fives times of what had previously been reported about how much oil was leaking into the [[Gulf of Mexico]].<ref>[http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-30/transocean-drops-after-axelrod-comments-on-drilling-update2-.html Transocean Drops After Axelrod Comments on Drilling,] Edward Klump, ''Bloomberg Business Week'', 30 April 2010. Retrieved 2 June 2010.</ref>

It has been reported in the [[finance|financial]] press that among owners of BP<ref>[http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-aims-at-bp-hits-state-pensions-2010-06-09 President Obama's ramped up rhetoric over the BP oil spill is beginning to have an effect,] ''MarketWatch, 9 June 2010.</ref> are
*New Jersey Division of Investment (51 million shares)
*California Public Employees Retirement System (36 million shares)
*Pennsylvania Public School Employees Retirement System (7.1 million shares)
*Teachers Retirement System of Alabama (4.5 million shares)
*Employees Retirement System of Texas (4.1 million shares)
*Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (1.1 million shares)
*Illinois State Board of Investment (1.1 million shares)<ref>In 1990 Barack Obama took a job with the Law Firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland ([http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/06/nation/na-obamalegal6 Obama's lawyer days: brief and not all civil rights,] Dan Morain, ''Los Angeles Times'' 2008-04-06). Allison S. Davis, a senior partner in the firm, went into business with [[Chicago]] slumlord [[Tony Rezko]]. Davis was appointed to the Illinois State Board of Investment by Governor [[Rod Blagojevich]] at Rezko's request in 2003. ([http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/644511 How reform-minded City Hall critic became a cozy insider,] Tim Novak, ''Chicago Sun-Times'', 2007-11-11).</ref>
*Indiana Public Employees' Retirement Fund (0.7 million shares)
*Washington State Investment Board (1.2 million shares)
*United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund (21.9 million shares).

BP was found [[Negligence|wilfully negligent]] during the [[Bush administration]] in a [[Texas]] refinery explosion incident, and was assessed $108 million in fines - the highest workplace safety fines in U.S. history.<ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/16/60minutes/main6490197_page5.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody Blowout: The Deepwater Horizon Disaster,] ''[[60 Minutes]]'', 16 May 2010. Retrieved from cbsnews.com, 2 June 2010.</ref>

=== Nalco and Corexit ===
[[File:Dermatitis4.jpg|right|375px|thumb|Dermatitis is one immediate health concern<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/28/bp-gulf-oil-spill-pollution Gulf oil spill is public health risk, environmental scientists warn,] Suzanne Goldenberg, ''[[Guardian (uk)]]'', 28 May 2010.</ref> of the [[Obama administration]]'s decision to use [[toxic]] substances to disperse the visibility of the spill.
[http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CB4QFjAD&url=http://www.chemie.uni-regensburg.de/Physikalische_Chemie/Kunz/student/Uebung_Formulierung/Clark_presentation.pdf&rct=j&q=photo+dermatitis+corexit&ei=qn0ITPGEM-qXlAfeo8TSAQ&usg=AFQjCNHp_FTjbxFEzZI4o9iMcapG_kFO3Q&sig2=zxmIoVnIi2vekrq3WB6ztA]Residents, cleanup workers, and tourists alike may be affected. [http://chealth.canoe.ca/channel_health_news_details.asp?news_id=31005&news_channel_id=145&channel_id=145] ]]
Nalco of Naperville, Illinois formed a joint venture with Exxon Chemical in 1994 and the company's current leadership includes several executives from BP. Nalco reported it sold in excess of $40 million to BP of its dispersant, Corexit, shortly after the [[Gulf of Mexico]] oil spill disaster.

Of 18 dispersants approved by the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA), 12 were found to be more effective on southern [[Louisiana]] crude than Corexit, EPA data show.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/business/energy-environment/13greenwire-less-toxic-dispersants-lose-out-in-bp-oil-spil-81183.html Less Toxic Dispersants Lose Out in BP Oil Spill Cleanup,]
Paul Quinlan, ''Greenwire'', May 13, 2010. Retrieved from nytimes.com 25 May 2010.</ref> Two of the 12 were found to be 100 percent effective on [[Gulf of Mexico]] crude, whereas two Corexit products rated only 56 percent and 63 percent effective.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The [[toxic]]ity of the other 12 was shown to be in some cases 10 or 20 times less than Corexit, according to the EPA.<ref>Ibid.</ref> "It's a chemical that the oil industry makes to sell to itself, basically," said Richard Charter, a senior policy adviser for Defenders of Wildlife.<ref>Ibid.</ref>

Corexit was found to be one of the most toxic dispersal agents ever developed.<ref>''Acute Aquatic Toxicity of Three Corexit Products: An Overview'', Anita George-Ares and James R. Clark. Report prepared for Exxon Biomedical Sciences.</ref> With seasonal warming of water temperature the toxicity grows. Corexit is banned in the [[United Kingdom]] due to [[environment]]al concerns.<ref>[http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/05/epa-bp-dispersants Why Is the EPA Letting BP Use Dirty Dispersants?], Kate Sheppard, ''Mother Jones'', 19 May 19 2010.</ref> The Obama EPA gave BP the green light to apply Corexit to the spill.<ref>Ibid.</ref> At the Congressional hearing investigating the Gulf oil spill disaster, [[Democratic]] Representative Jerrold Nadler of [[New York]] raised the prospect of "thousands and thousands of people getting sick or dying" as a result of the administration's sanctioned use of the dispersant.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/science/earth/28workers.html Worry About Dispersant Rises as Men in Work Crew Complain of Health Problems,] Leslie Kaufman and Elizabeth Rosenthal, ''New York Times'', 27 May 2010.</ref> Critics allege use of dispersants like Corexit are largely for cosmetic purposes. Nalco has been a frequent contributor to the campaign of Sen. [[Mary Landrieu]]<ref>http://saveourwetlands.org/index-landrieu.html/</ref> of Louisiana.<ref>http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/fec/?id=273&cycle=2007-2008</ref>

== Deepwater Horizons ==
[[File:Deepwater Horizon Fire.jpg|right|250px|thumb|Fire boat response crews battle the blazing remnants of the off shore oil rig Deepwater Horizon, April 21, 2010 (U.S. Coast Guard)]]
On [[Earth Day]] 2010, a BP-leased oil drilling rig sank to the bottom of the [[Gulf of Mexico]] two days after it exploded, creating what has been described as the "worst environmental disaster in [[American History Lectures|US history]]."<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/x-33986-Political-Spin-Examiner~y2010m4d29-Worst-environmental-disaster-in-US-history-Oil-slick-in-Gulf-of-Mexico-is-set-on-fire Worst environmental disaster in US history,] Maryann Tobin, ''Examiner'', April 29, 2010.</ref> [[Secretary of the Interior]] [[Ken Salazar]] told [[CNN]] "It potentially is catastrophic," and "I think we have to prepare for the worst."<ref>[http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/gulf-oil-spill:-impossible-to-measure-impact-of-%22unprecedented-environmental-disaster%22-477603.html?tickers=BP,HAL,CAM,RIG,XLE,OIL,USO Gulf Oil Spill: Impossible to Measure Impact of "Unprecedented Environmental Disaster",] Aaron Task, May 03, 2010. Retrieved from Yahoo Finance 12 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/02/salazar-oil-spill-massive-and-a-potential-catastrophe/ Salazar: Oil spill 'massive' and a potential catastrophe,] [[CNN]], 3 May 2010.</ref>

Congressional investigators think they have identified the rigs blowout preventer as the cause of the explosion. <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703339304575240323493707434.html Congress Homes In on Rig's Blowout Preventer,] Ben Casselman and Jennifer Levitz, ''Wall Street Journal Online,'' 13 May 2010.</ref> The blowout preventer was leaking hydraulic fluid, had a dead battery,<ref>Ibid.</ref> and was inspected by the Obama [[Minerals Management Service]] (MMS) only two weeks before to the explosion<ref>White House Press Office, [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/press-briefing-bp-oil-spill-gulf-coast Press Briefing on the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf Coast,] 29 April 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 12 May 2010.</ref> which killed 11 people. [[Amy Goodman]], a [[leftist]] radio talk show host, has suggested those responsible should be [[prosecute]]d for [[manslaughter]].<ref>[http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/law_order_corporate_crime_unit_20100518/ Law & Order,] Amy Goodman, 18 May 2010. Retrieved from truthdigg.com 30 May 2010.</ref>

Blowout preventers are meant to shut off the well, and the last line of defense is a set of shear rams which cut the pipe and seal off the well.<ref>Congress Homes In on Rig's Blowout Preventer, Ben Casselman and Jennifer Levitz, ''WSJ Online,'' 13 May 2010.</ref> The MMS, the [[Obama administration]] agency that regulates offshore drilling along with the Coast Guard, is supposed to require proof that shear rams are powerful enough to shut the well. Michael Saucier, MMS's regional supervisor testified before Congress that the MMS did not require BP to file a "scenario for potential blowout."<ref>Ibid.</ref> The MMS certified that BP "has the capacity to respond, to the maximum extent practicable, to a worst-case discharge, or a substantial threat of such a discharge."<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/29/gulf-oil-spill-exceeds-bp_n_556798.html</ref>

A May 2010 Inspector General's report revealed at least two MMS regulatory inspectors admitted to being under the influence of the [[illegal drug]] [[methamphetamine]] while on the job.<ref>[http://www.wusf.usf.edu/news/2010/05/25/drugs_free_football_tickets_and_porn_at_minerals_management_service Drugs, Free Football Tickets and Porn at Minerals Management Service,] 25 May 2010. Retrieved from wusf.usf.edu 26 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://www.tgdaily.com/business-and-law-features/49932-us-bureaucrats-smoked-crystal-meth-watched-porn-as-bp-oil-rig-blew US bureaucrats smoked crystal meth, watched porn as BP oil rig blew,] Starr Keshet, 25 May 2010. Retrieved from tgdaily.com 26 May 2010.</ref>

==Environmental disaster ==
[[File:Oil slick map.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Projections of the flow of the spill over the summer of 2010. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37497578/ns/local_news-new_york_ny/] ]]
On 29 April 2010 oil began washing ashore in Plaquemines Parish, [[Louisiana]]; four weeks later local leaders still were begging [[President Obama]] for federal assistance in responding to the disaster which was overtaking hundreds of miles of shoreline.<ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/26/gulf.oil.spill.plaquemines/index.html Plaquemines Parish president blasts federal response to oil spill,] CNN, 26 May 2010.</ref>

Crude oil has washed into marshes, estuaries and onto beaches in [[Mississippi]] and [[Alabama]]. Wildlife has been killed and efforts are underway to save oil-coated
birds. Without capping the well [[Florida]]'s Everglades may be turned into a "dead zone." Scientists expect currents to carry the oil slick to the eastern seaboard of the [[United States]], fouling beaches and estuaries like the [[Chesapeake Bay]] and fishing grounds of the Grand Banks off [[Newfoundland]].

=== Silverfish ===

Most scientists agree that Corexit 9500 will have a much larger biological effect when it reaches coastal areas teeming with wildlife.<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref> Many species are being threatened at a crucial time in their life cycle.<ref>[http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2818588720100428 FACTBOX-Possible environmental impact of Gulf oil spill,] ''[[Reuters]]'', 28 April 2010.</ref> In testing done by the U.S. [[Environmental Protection Agency]] the dispersant Corexit 9500 was found to be extremely lethal to silverfish, a benchmark [[organism]] in [[toxic]]ity testing.<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>

=== Gulf menhaden ===

Gulf menhaden are a [[specie]]s harvested mostly for fish meal and fish oil. Menhaden could be badly affected
by the spill.

=== Coral, oyster and shrimp ===

Corals, oyster and shrimp likewise are critically affected. Richard Charter, a foremost expert on marine biology and oil spills who is a senior policy advisor for Marine Programmes for Defenders of Wildlife and is chairman of the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council has said, “There is a [[chemical]] [[toxic]]ity to the dispersant compound that in many ways is worse than oil,” which "in so doing you may be more seriously damaging the ecosystem offshore.”<ref>Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic. Retreived from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref> Shrimp were found to be extremely vulnerable to the lethal effects of the chemical dispersant Corexit 9500 used by [[Obama administration]] disaster relief agencies and BP in testing done by the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA).<ref>Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative, Brandon Keim, ''Wired Science,'' 5 May 2010.</ref>

=== Brown pelican ===
[[File:Dead birds and sea turtles.jpg|right|325px|thumb|Dead birds and sea turtles. ]]
The [[Louisiana]] state bird, the Brown Pelican, was removed from protection under the U.S. Endangered Species Act in 2009. The Obama administration approved BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling rig without the proper environmental impact assessment (EIA) required by law. The disaster occurred just as breeding season commenced.

=== Other bird species ===

Other species endangered by the oil spill are American oystercatcher and Wilson's plover.

=== Sea turtles ===

As several species of sea turtles move through the Gulf during their spring nesting season, they need to surface to breathe.

=== Toxic oil spill rain ===
A report prepared by the [[Russia]]n Ministry of Natural Resources warned that the leaking [[crude oil]] into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] is about to become the worst [[environment]]al catastrophe in all of human history, threatening the entire eastern half of [[North America]] with “total destruction.” Russian scientists based the assessment on the use of millions of gallons of the government approved chemical dispersant Corexit.

The Russian scientists outlined that Corexit, with its 2.61ppm [[toxic]]ity level, combined with the seasonal warming of Gulf of Mexico waters, the [[molecule]]s will be able to “phase transition” from their present [[liquid]] to a gaseous state allowing them to be absorbed into clouds and released as “toxic rain” upon all of Eastern North America.

The scientists warned should a [[Hurricane Katrina]] like storm form in the Gulf while tens of millions of gallons of Corexit are floating on or near the surface, the resulting “toxic rain” falling upon the North American continent could “theoretically” destroy all microbial life to any depth it reaches resulting in an “unimaginable environmental catastrophe” destroying all kinds of life forms.<ref>[http://www.eutimes.net/2010/05/toxic-oil-spill-rains-warned-could-destroy-north-america/ Toxic oil spill rains warned could destroy North America,'] EUTimes, 24 May 2010. Retrieved 3 June 2010.</ref>

== The response ==

Initially [[Department of Homeland Security]] and the [[U.S. Coast Guard]] reported on 23 April 2010 there was no leak from the sunken oil rig.<ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-04-23-deepwater-horizon_N.htm Coast Guard: No oil leaking from sunken rig,] Rick Jervis, ''[[USA TODAY]]'', 23 April 2010.</ref> The next day the [[Obama administration]] officially estimated a leak from the sunken well at 1000 barrels per day.<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/24/oil-rig-deepwater-horizon_0_n_550849.html Oil Rig, Deepwater Horizon, Leaking Into Gulf Of Mexico,] Cain Burdeau, 4 April 2010. Retrieved from the ''[[Huffington Post]],'' 15 May 2010.</ref> The ''[[Associated Press]]'' reported it took nine days after the explosion and loss of life before President Obama made his first comments on the disaster.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100509/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_gulf_oil_spill_obama_s_response Obama oil response: aggressive as crisis unfolded,] ,H. Josef Hebert and Erica Werner, ''Associated Press'', 9 May 2010. Retrieved from news.yahoo.com 2 June 2010.</ref> BP's stock fell<ref>[http://in.reuters.com/article/idINLDE63S0HR20100429 European shares turn negative; BP falls,] ''Reuters'' 29 April 2010.</ref> on news of the "the worsening oil spill" and administration estimates were raised to 5000 barrels per day.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/29/us/29spill.html Size of Spill in Gulf of Mexico Is Larger Than Thought,] Campbell Robertson and Leslie Kaufman, ''New York Times,'' 28 April 2010. Retrieved 15 May 2010.</ref> and appointed a national incident commander.<ref>http://wallstcheatsheet.com/breaking-news/a-timeline-of-the-bp-oil-spill-crisis-pics/?p=10743/</ref>

=== U.S. Government dumps toxic dispersants into the Gulf of Mexico ===
[[File:Dispersants spraying.jpg|left|300px|thumb|Aerial image of the [[United States]] [[government]]'s dumping [[toxic]] disperants into the [[Gulf of Mexico]]. ]]
''Wired Science'' reports the [[Obama administration]] disaster-relief agencies are using a toxic chemical to disperse oil in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster. Use of dispersants are said to be a public relations strategy.<ref>[http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/05/gulf-dispersants/ Toxic Oil Dispersant Used in Gulf Despite Better Alternative,] Brandon Keim, 5 May 2010. Retrieved from ''Wired Science'' 15 May 2010.</ref> Secretary [[Janet Napolitano]] of the [[Department of Homeland Security]] acknowledged<ref>[http://www.oilspillupdates.com/oil-spill-videos/obama-oil-spill-bill-on-bp-chem-spray-to-save-nature/ Obama: Oil spill bill on BP, Chem spray to save nature,] Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Updates, 04th May 2010. Retrieved from oilspillupdates.com 29 May 2010.</ref> the U.S government was dumping toxic chemicals from [[C-130]] cargo aircraft onto the spill.<ref>[http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2010-05-02/news/os-oil-disaster-chemical-cleanup-20100502_1_dispersant-spill-crude Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix,] Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref> Jackie Savitz of the ocean-conservation group Oceana stated the use of dispersants is only slightly less horrendous than the Gulf oil spill itself. "You're basically pouring chemicals into the ocean, which is never a good thing."<ref>Ibid.</ref> According to a 2009 [[Environmental Protection Agency]] report dispersants have not been used in the United State prior to the Obama administration's approval at BP'S request "because of possible long-term environmental effects, difficulties with timely and effective application, disagreement among [[scientist]]s and research data about their environmental effects, effectiveness, and [[toxic]]ity concerns" and the effects "are still unknown."<ref>Ibid.</ref> Residents in areas close to the oil spill have reported odors and symptoms such as [[headache]]s, dizziness, [[nausea]], eye irritation, and respiratory problems.<ref>[http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/gsolomon/gulf_oil_spill_air_quality_upd.html Gulf Oil Spill Air Quality,] Gina Solomon, 24 May 2010. Retrieved from Natural Resources Defense Council Staff Blog, 3 June 2010.</ref>

=== Disregard for worker safety ===
[[File:Cleaup300.jpg|right|275px|thumb|Cleanup workers exposed to the Obama adminsitration's decision to use known [[toxic]] substances to disperse the spill. Critics allege dispersants are ineffective and largely for cosmetic purposes. ]]
The ''[[Guardian (uk)]]'' has reported the controversy over Corexit exposes the [[Obama administration]] to criticism that its scientific agencies have been too accommodating to BP's strategy. In addition to the use of Corexit, the Obama [[Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA) came under fire for withholding test results on the toxicity of the water close to shore.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/20/gulf-oil-spill-chemical-dispersant</ref>

The dispersant 2-BE is known to cause heath dangers to clean up workers<ref>http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/gsolomon/oil_spill_clean-up_workers_get.html</ref> and wildlife alike.<ref>[http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2010/chem_dispersants_work_at_cost Chemical dispersants seem to be keeping oil from Gulf shore, but results may range from simply cosmetic to very toxic.] Retrieved from Belona.org 15 May 2010.</ref> 2-BE has been documented to cause the breakdown of [[red blood cell]]s, leading to blood in urine and feces, and can damage the kidneys, liver, spleen and [[bone marrow]] of humans – effects not included on the information sheet for workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref> The dispersant Corexit 9500 is associated with headaches, vomiting and reproductive problems as sides effects to clean-up workers.<ref>Ibid.</ref> Lawrence Duffy of the University of Alaska claims dispersants "are more a public relations measure than a preventive one. It has an effect on our psychology because we don't see the oil slick,"<ref>Ibid.</ref> though oil particles continue to do damage.<ref>Oil-spill disaster: Chemicals used in cleanup add to toxic mix, Kevin Spear, ''Orlando Sentinel,'' 2 May 2010.</ref>

=== Government mismanagement of relief efforts ===

Three weeks into the disaster [[National Public Radio]] reported the [[Obama administration]]'s official figures were still grossly underestimated<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126809525 Gulf Spill May Far Exceed Official Estimates,] Richard Harris, ''National Public Radio,'' 14 May 2010.</ref> and after the first month it was finally admitted the spill was nearly three times larger than earlier thought.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/us/28flow.html Estimates Suggest Spill Is Biggest in U.S. History,] Tom Zeller, Jr., ''New York Times'', 27 May 2010.</ref>

Federal officials did not begin burning the leaking oil off the surface of the water until one full week after the rig collapsed.<ref>[http://blog.al.com/live/2010/04/burning_should_have_started_a.html Burning should have started a week ago, former NOAA official says,] Ben Raines, ''Mobile Press-Register'', 29 April 2010.</ref> Louisiana Governor [[Bobby Jindal]] criticized [[President Obama]] for his slow response.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzEntQPr9OA</ref> ''The New York Times'' castigated the [[White House]] for delays and not moving quick enough, calling the evidence "damning" and declaring the Gulf oil spill a "huge disaster whose consequences might have been minimized with swifter action" from the [[Obama administration]].<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/01/opinion/01sat1.html Unanswered Questions on the Spill,] ''New York Times'' Editorial, 30 April 2010.</ref> One month into the spill, [[Democrat]]ic stalwarts [[James Carville]],<ref>[http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2521614/posts Is James Carville racist?], 26 May 2010. Retrieved from freerepublic.com 30 May 2010.</ref> [[Chris Matthews]],<ref>http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37632.html#ixzz0om46RhGH</ref> and Donna Brazile<ref>http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/99375-donna-brazile-calls-obamas-oil-spill-response-not-tough-enough</ref> criticized the inept and bungled response to the spreading catastrophe.
[[File:Finalisttransoce.jpeg|left|250px|thumb|Chris Oynes (left) of the Mineral Management Service presents Keelan Adamson (right) of Transocean the MMS's, ''Safety Award for Excellence'' (SAFE),<ref>http://www.mms.gov/awards/SAFEcriteria.htm</ref> at the MMS National Award luncheon, 7 May 2009.<ref>http://www.beaconmag.com/gomrigteamswinmm.html</ref> ''Source: Beacon magazine'']]
The [[White House]] lacked any type of plan to combat the disaster. [[U.S. House of Representatives|House]] Democratic Majority Leader [[Steny Hoyer]] publicly admitted that the [[Obama Administration]] was ill-prepared to deal with the situation. <ref>[http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2010/04/mms-thought-deepwater-horizon-was-awardwinningly-safe.html MMS Thought Deepwater Horizon was Award-Winningly SAFE,] The Project on Government Oversight, Exposing Government Corruption, 29 April 2010.</ref> While the disaster steadily grew, Obama did not discuss the crisis at length until he appeared at a photo op at Venice, Louisiana on 3 May 2010.<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126467960 Obama Says Oil Spill Damage Could Be Unprecedented,] Scott Horsley, [[NPR]], 3 May 2010.</ref> He would order a moratorium on all future deep sea oil platforms until they determine the problems associated with the current situation. As to be expected, Obama tries to remove himself from blame saying "the system failed", this despite the fact the he heads the system. Then he pointed fingers of blame at oil companies while taking an indirect jab at the Bush administration. <ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20005039-503544.html Angry Obama Seeks to Deflect Blame for Gulf Oil Spill Crisis, CBS, May 14, 2010]</ref>
{{cquote|For too long, for a decade or more, there has been a cozy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agency that permits them to drill. It seems as if permits were too often issued based on little more than assurances of safety from the oil companies. That cannot and will not happen anymore.}}
White House spokesman [[Robert Gibbs]] did his best to put a good spin on the disaster claiming the response was "comprehensive and fast." Meanwhile, the [[Democrat]]-led Congress ordered public hearings from oil executives. President Obama blamed others saying the answers from oil executives were a "ridiculous spectacle," "You had executives of BP and Transocean and Halliburton falling over each other to point the finger of blame at somebody else." <ref>[http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/burning_rig_of_fire_VkeuMCffwTUd9IBS7gUV7K?CMP=OTC-rss&FEEDNAME=#ixzz0oWm4u9zQ New look at Gulf oil spill as cleanup continues, NYPost, May 15, 2010]</ref> As the disaster progressed and questions arose over the government's misreporting and withholding<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/bp-feds-withheld-videos-showing-massive-scope-oil/story?id=10819367 BP and Feds Withheld Videos Showing Massive Scope of Oil Spill:] Coast Guard Told Public Not to 'Fixate' On Rate of Spill While Sitting On Video, Brian Ross, Matthew York, and Avni Patel, ABC News, 3 June 2010.</ref> of information from the [[public]] about the true dimensions of the calamity, the ''[[Associated Press]]'' noted,
{{cquote|First [Obama] was going to make BP pay for the Gulf oil mess. Then he declared himself in charge. Now he's trying to find out 'whose ass to kick' and making clear he'd fire BP's chief if only he could.<ref>http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100608/D9G7C5U00.html</ref>}}

=== Assistance of foreign governments ===
Nearly two-months after the disaster took place, the Obama administration decides to utilize the assistance offered by 17 countries, the U.N and the European Union. <ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/13/AR2010061304232.html After delays, [[U.S.]] begins to tap foreign aid for gulf oil spill, WaPo, June 14, 2010]</ref> International aid offers already accepted include two skimmers and 2.6 miles (4.2 kilometers) of boom from [[Mexico]], three sets of sweeping arm systems from the Netherlands and 1.86 miles (3.0 kilometers) of boom from Canada, the State Department said. The State Department noted that it has assisted BP in directly sourcing equipment and technical experts from around the world, including from Algeria, Australia, Bahrain, [[Brazil]], [[Canada]], China, Denmark, Latvia, Norway, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, and the [[United Kingdom]]. <ref>[http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/breakingnews/view/20100615-275709/US-taps-into-foreign-assistance-for-Gulf-oil-spill US taps into foreign assistance for Gulf oil spill, Agence France-Presse, June 15, 2010]</ref>

===Public relations offensive===
Faced with declining poll numbers and a public relations calamity, [[President Obama]] took to the airwaves nearly 60 days into the spill. A ''New York Times'' Op-ed commented,
{{cquote|All we got from President Obama was a vague call for some sort of new energy policy. Plus a Gulf Coast Restoration Plan, an oil spill study commission, a reminder that the secretary of energy won a Nobel Prize in physics and 17 references to God, prayer, blessings or faith.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/opinion/17collins.html The Boring Speech Policy,] Gail Collins, ''New York Times'' Op-ed, 16 June 2010.</ref><ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2010/06/17/behar-laments-shocking-bush-obama-garofalo-slams-anti-intellectual-pr Behar Panel Sees '[[Bush]]-Like' and '[[Corporatist]]' [[Obama]], [[Janeane Garofalo|Garofalo]] Slams 'Anti-Intellectual' [[Prayer]],] Joy Behar Show, [[CNN]]. Retrieved from newsbusters.org, 20 June 2010.</ref>}}
Former speechwriter for President [[Jimmy Carter]], [[Chris Matthews]], chided the President after his address to the nation,
{{cquote|Ludicrous that he keeps saying [Secretary of Energy] [[Steven Chu|Chu]] has a [[Nobel prize]]. I'll barf if he does it one more time.<ref>[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/06/15/msnbc_trashes_obamas_address_compared_to_carter_i_dont_sense_executive_command.html MSNBC Trashes Obama's Address: Compared To Carter, "I Don't Sense Executive Command,"]. Retrieved from RealClearPolitics.com, 20 June 2010.</ref>}}

==Economic impacts==
[[File:Oilslick.png|right|275px|thumb| Oil slick map as of May 30, 2010.]]
The economic impact of the [[Gulf of Mexico]] oil drilling disaster will be large and devastating to several key industries, including fishing, tourism, and transportation.<ref>[http://www.ihsglobalinsight.com/Perspective/PerspectiveDetail18638.htm Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Gulf Coast Oil Spill,] Nariman Behravesh, 4 May 2010. Retrieved from ihsglobalinsights.com 8 May 2020.</ref>

The top commercial species in terms of value are shrimp ($367 million), menhaden ($64 million), oysters ($59 million), and blue crab ($38 million).<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Fisheries Economics of the United States, Silver Spring, MD, 2008.</ref> As of 25 May 2010, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) closed 54,096 square miles to commercial and recreational fishing.<ref>http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/deepwater_horizon_oil_spill.htm</ref> These areas are some of the richest fishing grounds in the Gulf of Mexico for major commercial species such as white shrimp, blue crab, and oysters.

===Employment in fishing===
The most immediate economic impact of the oil spill has been on the Gulf fishing<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/video/asset/fishing-industry-hammered-by-gulf-oil-spill/41612D0E-B338-464D-A15E-5885B1D227D6</ref> industry. The number of [[job]]s at stake, which includes seafood processing and related wholesale and retail, is over 200,000 with related [[economic]] activity of $5.5 billion.<ref>[http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41262.pdf Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Selected Issues for Congress,] Curry L. Hagerty and Jonathan L. Ramseur, Congressional Research Service, 27 May 2010. (pdf p. 2.).</ref>

Dockside sales in [[Louisiana]] are approximately $660 million.<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Departtment of Commerce, [http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st5/publication/econ/2008/FEUS%202008%20ALL.pdf Fisheries Economics of the United States,] Silver Spring, MD, 2008. (pdf).</ref> Loses to the Louisiana fishing could be as high as $2.5 billion.<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/story/insurers-brace-for-liability-hit-from-oil-spill-2010-05-05</ref>

===Employment in tourism===

The tourist industry employs 620,000 people who earn over $9 billion in wages in the Gulf of Mexico region. Analysts say [[Florida]] alone could lose $3 billion in tourism.<ref>[http://www.royalgazette.com/rg/Article/article.jsp?articleId=7da532730030019&sectionId=65 Insurance industry concern grows over oil spill liability,] Alistair Barr, ''Royal Press Gazette'', 6 May 2010.</ref>

In 2008, recreational anglers took 25.4 million fishing trips and spent over $12 billion on equipment and trips in the Gulf region.<ref>National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Fisheries Economics of the United States, Silver Spring, MD, 2008.</ref> Some of the most popular recreational species include snappers, several types of drum, sheepshead, and Spanish mackerel. Recreational fisheries support businesses such as charters, bait and tackle, and services such as restaurants and hotels.

In 2000, 21.9 million people visited Gulf beaches and accounted for 177.2 million beach days.<ref>Brent Ache, David Bylsma, and Kristen Crossett, et al., The Gulf of Mexico at a Glance, National Ocean Service, NOAA, A Tool for the Gulf of Mexico Alliance and the American Public, Washington, DC, 2008. [http://gulfofmexicoalliance.org/pdfs/gulf_glance_1008.pdf pdf].</ref>

===Transportation===
The Offshore Marine Service Association (OMSA),<ref>[http://www.marinelog.com/DOCS/NEWSMMIX/2010jun00034.html OMSA slams offshore drilling moratorium,] 3 June 2010. Retrieved from Marinelog.com, 19 June 2010.</ref> the national trade association for U.S. flag vessels in the energy sector, criticized the [[Obama administration]]'s moratorium on offshore drilling projects. 100,000 jobs were immediately affected by the president's decision as companies began cancelling contracts to carry supplies, forcing layoffs. "The industry has struggled to climb out of a severe economic downturn. The moratorium threatens any hope of recovery and creates the potential for economic hardship that could last a decade or longer," remarked OMSA President Ken Wells.

OMSA estimates that for every mariner who works on-board a vessel, there are nine other Americans working in shore-side jobs that support vessel operations. Beyond the vessel crew, the negative consequences of the moratorium could impact everyone from service technicians supporting everything from diesel engines to the air condition systems to the local grocer who supplies food for the boat's galley.

Offshore vessels are a major part of the tax base in many coastal communities. Gulf Coast state and local government revenues will also decrease due to lower [[income tax]] and [[sales tax]] collections.

Disruption of shipping traffic in and out of the Port of [[New Orleans]] will impact barge, container, and tanker traffic in the Mississippi Delta and along the [[Mississippi River]]. Prices of all types of commodities would affected.

=== Insurance industry ===

BP, the operator on the oil drilling lease with a 65% stake, insured itself, rather than buying coverage from insurance companies. Industry analysts estimate total costs related to the oil spill cleanup and damages could exceed $14 billion. <ref>[http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKLDE6410IJ20100502 U.S. oil spill could bill could exceed $14 billion,] Tom Bergin, ''Reuters,'' 2 May 2010.</ref>

=== Lost revenue to state and local governments ===
:'''Louisiana'''
A Greater New Orleans study indicates the [[Obama administration]]'s moratorium could cost [[Louisiana]] as many as 22,000 jobs and more than $782 million in revenues.

With the average deepwater rig employing 230 workers with an average salary of $98,000, the study puts the tax revenue impact at $151 million if drilling were to resume within 18 months. Greater New Orleans President and CEO Michael Hecht says it’s difficult to be optimistic based on President Obama’s [[Oval Office]] address on 15 June 2010. President Obama's action “has the potential to turn an ecological tragedy into an economic calamity,” Hecht said.<ref>[http://neworleanscitybusiness.com/blog/2010/06/16/study-moratorium-could-cost-up-to-22000-jobs-782m-in-lost-revenue/ Study: Moratorium could cost up to 22,000 jobs, $782M in lost revenue,] Greg LaRose, ''New Orleans City Business'', 16 June 2010.</ref> The study foresees in a worse case scenario the loss of more than 22,000 jobs, 3,450 of them directly tied to the operating rigs and 18,945 with indirect ties such as catering firms and other companies that serve U.S energy producers.

Fearing that the drilling moratorium "could exacerbate, rather than alleviate, the impacts of this spill upon both our [[economy]] and our [[environment]]," U.S. Senator [[Mary Landrieu]] wrote to President Obama on 11 June 2010.<ref>http://landrieu.senate.gov/mediacenter/pressreleases/06-11-2010-1.cfm</ref> Landrieu stated,
{{Cquote|more than 300,000 Louisianians are employed either directly or indirectly by the oil and gas industry. ..The immediate impacts to the economy are devastating enough: idling the 33 rigs currently permitted to drill in the deepwater Gulf would immediately impact [[employment]] for roughly 38,000 crewmen, deck hands, engineers, welders, ROV operators, caterers, helicopter pilots, and others who operate and service these vessels. That's like closing 12 large motor vehicle assembly plants in one state, all at once.}}

Lost state and local tax revenues will accrue at a rate between $8 million and $15 million a month. Federal royalty losses will be substantial and a significant drop in tolls collected for the Louisiana Highway 1 bridge at Leeville, the main artery to the Port Fourchon energy port is projected as well.
:'''Texas'''
The [[Texas]] state comptroller’s office reported collection of $2.3 billion in oil and natural gas production taxes in fiscal year 2009 and $4.1 billion in 2008. The tax revenue is used to repair roads and fund schools, among other state services. Although no official analysis of President Obama's decision to place a moratorium on offshore production has been compiled yet, the Texas comptroller’s office said it’s unclear how much of an impact the president's decision will have on state services. Experts warn the president's decision could threaten tens of thousands of jobs in the [[Houston]] area.<ref>[http://www.kvue.com/news/state/Deepwater-drilling-moratorium-threatens-Texas-tax-revenue-95848579.html Deepwater drilling moratorium threatens Texas' tax revenue,] Gabe Gutierrez, 8 June 2010. Retrieved from kvue.com, 20 June 2010.</ref>
:'''Alabama'''
Manufacturing jobs in [[Alabama]] are at risk as a result of [[President Obama]]'s actions, as no new orders for equipment are coming in.<ref>[http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=94652 NOIA Member Cos Feel Drilling Moratorium Impacts,] National Ocean Industries Association, 11 June 2010.</ref>

=== Increased dependency on foreign oil ===

[[New Jersey]] Democrat Senator [[Robert Menendez]] proposed a ban on new offshore drilling permits and submitted a bill that would retroactively raise the financial liability of BP from $75 million to $10 billion. <ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/05/senator-menendez-on-oil-spill-no-new-drilling-permits.html Senator Menendez on Oil Spill: No New Drilling Permits, ABCNews, May 12, 2010]</ref> Oklahoma [[Republican]] Senator [[James Inhofe]] successfully killed the bill saying it would reduce competition and shut down smaller independent oil companies in favor of larger companies.

=== Too big to fail ===
An oil industry trade publication<ref>[http://oilprice.com/Environment/Oil-Spills/The-Cover-up-BP-s-Crude-Politics-and-the-Looming-Environmental-Mega-Disaster.html The Cover-up: BP's Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster,] Wayne Madsen, 06 May 2010. Retrieved from oilprice.com 6 June 2010.</ref> reports [[President Obama]] and senior White House staff, as well as Interior Secretary [[Ken Salazar]], are working with BP on [[legislation]] that would raise the cap on [[liability]] for damage claims from those affected by the oil disaster from $75 million to $10 billion. However the disaster has the real potential of costing nearly $1 trillion. Critics point out that in the deal between Obama and BP, $10 billion is a drop in the bucket for a trillion dollar disaster. Talk is noted in government circles, including [[FEMA]], of the need to nationalize BP in order to compensate those who will ultimately be affected by the worst oil disaster in the history of the world, and BP would, if its assets were nationalized, be credited with almost a trillion dollars for compensation purposes.<ref>[http://www.infowars.com/the-cover-up-bps-crude-politics-and-the-looming-environmental-mega-disaster-2/ The Cover-up: BP's Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster,] Wayne Madsen, 06 May 2010. Retrieved from infowars.com 6 June 2010.</ref><ref>[http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/31/why_obama_should_put_bp_under_temporary_receiversh/ Why Obama Should Put BP Under Temporary Receivership,] [[Obama_doublespeak#Change|Robert Reich]], 31 May 2010. Retrieved from talkingpointsmemo.com, 6 June 2010.</ref>

After Obama charged [[Attorney General]] [[Eric Holder]] to investigate the disaster, BP establish a $20 billion extrajudicial fund managed by an Obama appointee.<ref>[http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37574 Obama's Latest Shakedown,] David Limbaugh, ''Human Events'', 06/20/2010.</ref> Former [[CNN]] news writer and radio talk show host Mike Malloy suggested Holder is beholden to [[corporatist]] interests.<ref>[http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100603042451.aspx The AG vs. BP: Little Skepticism on ABC and NBC, While Lefty Talker Blasts Holder as 'Corporatist' Pretender], Rich Noyes, Media Research Center, 3 June 2010.</ref>
[[File:Energy Tax bill.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Estimated impact of Obama Energy Tax in job losses. Total job loss: 2.2 million. ''Source: National Black Chamber of Commerce'' [http://www.nationalbcc.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=750:nbcc-study-generates-concerns-about-waxmanmarkey-climate-change-bill-costs-are-high-but-benefits-are-uncertain&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=7] ]]
== Revitalizing the cap and trade energy tax ==
:''Main article:'' '''[[Cap and trade]]'''
[[President Obama]] has been roundly criticized by [[Democrat]]s and [[Republican]]s alike for attempting to use the [[nation]]al tragedy to revitalized his failed Cap and Trade energy proposals. The Obama proposal, widely perceived as a job-killer tax increase, has stalled in the [[U.S. Senate]]. [[California]] Senator [[Dianne Feinstein]] has stated the climate bill "isn't going to stop the oil leak."<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/15/obamas-pitch-energy-speech-gulf-crisis-infuriates-republicans/ Obama Draws Bipartisan Criticism for Using Oil Spill to Push Energy Policy,] [[FOXNews]].com, 16 June 2010.</ref>

[[Environmentalist]]s want the President to push the program. Fred Krupp of the Environmental Defense Fund calls the opportunity "a political moment" to pass a carbon tax estimated to cost the average U.S. household $4300 per year.<ref>[http://blog.heritage.org/2009/05/15/the-4300-energy-tax/ The $4300 Energy Tax,] Nicolas Loris, 15 May 2009. Retrieved from Heritage.org, 19 June 2010.</ref>

Joel Benenson, who conducted polling for Obama’s presidential campaign, thinks the tax increase could pass, but wary Senate Democrats say otherwise. “There’s not a great call for it" said [[West Virginia]] Democratic Senator [[Jay Rockefeller]]. “It’s unrelated” to the immediate crisis in the Gulf noted Senator [[Ben Nelson]], Democrat from [[Nebraska]].<ref>[http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-16/democrats-say-climate-bill-lacks-momentum-after-spill-update3-.html Democrats Say Climate Bill Lacks Momentum After Spill,] Lisa Lerer and Simon Lomax, ''Bloomberg'', 16 June 2010. </ref>

== Criticism of the Obama administration's handling of the disaster ==
[[File:Memorial for oil workers.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Memorial service for the 11 workers killed in the explosion. ''Reuters'' [http://www.daylife.com/photo/00nya1C9URdAy?q=Mississippi] ]]
Former top adviser to President [[Bill Clinton]], [[James Carville]], turned visibly emotional in a interview with [[George Stephanopoulos]] on [[ABC]]'s ''[[Good Morning America]]'' over [[President Barack Obama]]'s "lackadaisical" response to the Gulf oil spill disaster.
{{Cquote|The political [[stupid]]ity is unbelievable. ... The President of the United States could have come down here. He could have been involved with the families of these 11 people...... He could have implemented a plan in anticipation of this... He could be commandeering tankers and making BP bring tankers in and clean this up.... He could be deploying people to the coast. He could be with the corps of engineers and the Coast Guard with these people in Plaquemines Parish, doing something about these regulations. These people are crying. They're begging for something down here. And it just looks like he's not involved in this! Man, you have got to get down here and take control of this! Put somebody in charge of this and get this thing moving! We're about to die down here!<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/bp-oil-spill-political-headache-obama-democrats-slam/story?id=10746519 'Political Stupidity': Democrat James Carville Slams Obama's Response to BP Oil Spill; Democratic Strategist Said White House Should've Acted Quickly: 'We're About to Die Down Here',] Jake Tapper and Huma Khan, ''Good Morning America,'' 26 May 2010. Retrieved from abcnews.go.com 28 May 2010.</ref><ref>[http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0526/unhinged-carville-obama-gulf/ Unhinged Carville goes off on Obama on oil spill, The Raw Story, May 26, 2010]</ref><ref>http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasalert/2010/20100526121155.aspx</ref>}}
Carville also said in a separate interview on [[CNN]] with [[Anderson Cooper]],
{{Cquote|They are risking everything by this ‘go along with BP’ strategy they have. They seem, like, lackadaisical on this...they seem like they’re inconvenienced by this, this is some giant thing getting in their way and somehow or another, if you let BP handle it, it’ll all go away. It’s not going away. It’s growing out there. It is a disaster of the first magnitude...the government thinks that they are partnering with BP. I think they actually believe that BP has some kind of a good motivation here. That’s one of the, sort of, whole flaws is they're naïve.<ref>[http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1005/23/sotu.01.html State of the Union with Candy Crowley,] CNN, 23 May 2010. Retrieved 20 May 2010.</ref><ref>http://www.mediaite.com/tv/james-carville-obama-administration-seems-inconvenienced-by-bp-oil-spill/</ref>}}
Obama acknowledged the criticism days later in a televised press conference:
{{Cquote|Where I was wrong was in my belief that the oil companies had their act together when it came to worst-case scenarios.<ref>Remarks by President Obama on the Gulf Oil Spill, Office of the Press Secretary, 27 May 2010. Retrieved from whitehouse.gov 29 May 2010.</ref>}}
[[File:Day12 comedyskit1.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Day 12 of the Disaster: Obama enjoys an evening of levity and banter with the Washington Press Corps at the White House Correspondent's Dinner.]]
[[MSNBC]] talk show host [[Chris Matthews]]<ref>Matthews said of Obama during the Potomac Primaries, "it's part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama's speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often." [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/13/chris-matthews-i-felt-thi_n_86449.html]</ref> said on [[Jay Leno]]'s ''Tonight Show'',
{{Cquote|The president scares me. He's been acting a little like a Vatican Observer here. When is he actually going to do something? And I worry. I know he doesn't want to take ownership of it. I know politics. He said the minute he says, 'I'm in charge,' he takes the blame.<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100524/pl_ynews/ynews_pl2219 White House seeks to fend off growing chorus of critics on handling of Gulf spill,] ''Yahoo News'', 24 May 2010. Retrieved 30 May 2010.</ref>}}

[[Secretary of State]] [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]'s presidential campaign manager in 2008 questioned if [[Democratic]] primary [[voter]]s had
{{Cquote|underestimated the value of experience and crisis management as important attributes for their president.<ref>[http://topics.npr.org/article/04M3gpJa4p92Z?q=NPR Did 2008 Democratic primary voters underestimate value of experience?] Alex Pappas, ''The Daily Caller'', 06/06/10. Retrieved from npr.org, 6 June 2010.</ref>}}

Donna Brazile, who managed the presidential campaign of Democratic [[candidate]] [[Al Gore]] in 2000 said on [[ABC]]'s ''[[This Week]]'',
{{Cquote|One of the problems I have with the administration is that they're not tough enough. They are waiting for BP to say, ‘oh, we've got a new plan to stop the oil leak.’ They need to stop it, contain it, clean it up, and try to help us conserve our coastal wetlands.<ref>[http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/99375-donna-brazile-calls-obamas-oil-spill-response-not-tough-enough Donna Brazile calls Obama’s oil spill response ‘not tough enough’,] Ben Geman, ''The Hill'', 23 May 2010.</ref>}}

[[Dick Morris]], an intimate adviser to President [[Bill Clinton]] observed,
{{Cquote|these failings show that Obama is in over his head. But to the [[left]], which bleeds for each drop of water in the gulf and cries over every turtle or shrimp or sea bird, it is an unpardonable sin...Obama's incompetence and inexperience is causing [[liberal]]s to see him as arrogant, aloof, removed, conceited, suspicious of outside advice and even lazy...these character defects will haunt the president until 2012 and beyond.<ref>[http://townhall.com/columnists/DickMorrisandEileenMcGann/2010/06/19/dems_turn_on_obama?page=full&comments=true Dems Turn On Obama,] Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, 19 June 2010. Retrieved from Townhall.com 19 June 2010.</ref>}}

David Gergen worked in the [[Reagan]], [[George H.W. Bush]], and Clinton White House remarked,
{{Cquote|If our government had fought [[WWII]] like the way we’re fighting the oil spill, there’s a good chance many of us would be speaking [[German]] today.<ref>[http://www.ihatethemedia.com/david-gergen-rips-obama-oil-spill-response Another Democrat turns on Obama: David Gergen rips Obama’s oil spill response, Ihatethemedia.com, May 27, 2010]</ref>}}

[[Peggy Noonan]], a speech writer for President's Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, summed up public perceptions with,
{{Cquote|The president, in my view, continues to govern in a way that suggests he is chronically detached from the central and immediate concerns of his countrymen.... he has not, almost from the day he was inaugurated, been in sync with the [[Centrist|center]]....The American people have spent at least two years worrying that high government spending would, in the end, undo the republic. They saw the dollars gushing night and day...And now we have a videotape metaphor for all the public’s fears: the well gushing black oil into the [[Gulf of Mexico]] ...His philosophy is that it is appropriate for the federal government to occupy a more burly, significant and powerful place in America—confronting its problems of need, injustice, inequality. ... Then the oil spill came and government could not do the job, could not meet the need ...[[Hurricane Katrina|Katrina]] illustrate[d] that even though the federal government in our time has continually taken on new missions and responsibilities, the more it took on, the less it seemed capable of performing even its most essential jobs. [[Conservative]]s got this point—they know it without being told—but [[liberal]]s and [[progressive]]s did not. They thought Katrina was the result only of [[George W. Bush]]’s incompetence and conservatives’ failure to “believe in government.” But Mr. Obama was supposed to be competent....It’s not good to have a president in this position—weakened, polarizing and lacking broad public support—less than halfway through his term. That it is his fault is no comfort.<ref>[http://www.peggynoonan.com/article.php?article=524 He Was Supposed to Be Competent]: The spill is a disaster for the president and his political philosophy., Peggy Noonan, ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'', 29 May 2010.</ref>}}

''[[New York Times]]'' columnist [[Liberal_hate_speech#Against_the_disabled|Maureen Dowd]] wrote,
{{Cquote|Obama and top aides who believe in his [[divinity]] make a mistake to dismiss complaints of his aloofness as Washington white noise. He treats the press as a nuisance rather than examining his own inability to encapsulate Americans’ feelings.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/30/opinion/30dowd.html Once More, With Feeling,] Maureen Dowd, ''New York Time'' Op Ed, 29 mMay 2010.l</ref>}}

Actor Robert Redford demanded action from the [[Obama administration]]. The liberal special interest group [[Natural Resources Defense Council]] has Redford in a new ad decrying the lackluster response.<ref>[http://biggovernment.com/jmeath/2010/05/25/obamas-katrina-in-the-gulf/ Obama’s ‘Katrina’ in the Gulf, BigGovernment.com, May 25, 2010]</ref> Redford made an appearance on MSNBC and said there is no one manning this ship,
{{Cquote|In this case, we don’t need a disaster manager, we need a leader.}}

[[Hollywood values|Liberal Hollywood]] director [[James Cameron]] says;
{{cquote|Over the last few weeks I've watched, as we all have, with growing horror and heartache, watching what's happening in the Gulf and thinking those morons don't know what they're doing. <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/cameron-titanic-spill-morons/2010/06/03/id/361007 'Titanic' Director Cameron: 'Morons' Directing Spill Efforts, NewsMax, June, 2010]</ref>}}

Obnoxious Hollywood liberal [[Rosie O'Donnell]] said, "We broke the womb of freaking mother Earth." <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2010/06/08/rosie-odonnell-wants-bps-assets-seized-we-broke-freakin-womb-mother-eart Rosie O'Donnell Wants BP's Assets Seized, NewsBusters.org, June 8, 2010]</ref> In addition, O'Donnell accused BP of
{{cquote|willful homicide, willful mass murder" and demanded BP be nationalized immediately: "I say seize their assets. Right now. Seize their assets today. Take over the company.}}

===Foreign reaction===
Relations between allies the [[U.K.]] and U.S. are now at historic lows thanks to Barack Obama's mishandling of the oil spill. Britain had been repeatedly mocked by Obama prior to the spill<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/mar/06/obama-dvd-brown Obama's DVD gift to Brown - it's the thought that counts,] ''Guardian UK,'' March 6, 2009.</ref> <ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4623148/Barack-Obama-sends-bust-of-Winston-Churchill-on-its-way-back-to-Britain.html Barack Obama sends bust of Winston Churchill on its way back to Britain,] ''Telegraph UK,'' February 14, 2009.</ref> <ref>[http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/03/obama_disses_brit_pm.html Obama disses Brit PM, American Thinker,] March 5, 2009.</ref> but now find themselves subjected to endless [[propaganda]]. Prominent foreign dignitaries have expressed the public's growing frustration with the administration's posturing and hunt for scapegoats. The mayor of London, Boris Johnson, who supported Obama in 2008, decried "anti-British rhetoric, buck-passing and name-calling" while Lord Tebbit branded Mr Obama's conduct “despicable” and the president's rhetoric
{{cquote|a crude, [[bigot]]ed, [[xenophobic]] display of [[partisan]] political Presidential petulance."<ref>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1285467/BP-OIL-SPILL-Lord-Tebbit-Boris-Johnson-attack-Obamas-anti-British-rhetoric.html#ixzz0rK7zthtN</ref><ref>[http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23843524-boris-johnson-tells-barack-obama-stop-bashing-britain.do Boris Johnson tells Barack Obama: Stop bashing Britain,] London Evening Standard, June 6, 2010.</ref>}}
The atmosphere Obama created in Britain is so toxic that the British press has labelled Barack Obama the most unpopular man in England. <ref>[http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/06/17/2010-06-17_president_barack_obama_is_the_most_hated_man_in_england_says_british_reporter.html Barack Obama: the most unpopular man in Britain?,] Telegraph UK, June 17, 2010.</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|3}}

[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Disasters]]
[[Category: Environment]]

==External Links==
* [http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23oilspill Twitter Feed: #Oilspill (warning vulgar comments left)]
* [http://www.bp.com/bodycopyarticle.do?categoryId=1&contentId=7052055&nicam=USCSBaselineCrisis&nisrc=Google&nigrp=Non_Branded Official BP Global Oil Spill News Website]
* [http://dailybail.com/slideshows/bp-disaster-dying-birds/5613601 Photos of Gulf birds covered in oil]

Talk:Libertarianism

2010-07-13T15:31:00Z

ChrisGT90: /* Reagan Quote */ new section

Jaques-- why did you delete the link to liberalism (which is a page that exists) but leave the link to classical liberalism (which is a page that doesnt exist)??--[[User:Redblue|Redblue]] 18:04, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Is that supposed to be humorist Dave Barry? Links would help on these people if they are important enough to be listed here. [[User:Human|Human]] 22:16, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

I'm unsure how libertarianism is "closely" connected to liberalism. From the social point of view, this is evident; However, libertarians believe in small government, a viewpoint often shared by conservatives (except in times of war, it seems). [[User:KxWaal|KxWaal]] 22:16, 28 June 2007 (EDT)

== Right wing ==

"Libertarianism is generally considered right-wing." Is this true anymore? I know it used to be true before social issues were more important to the political landscape, but nowadays libertarians agree with liberals on things (war on drugs, abortion, war in Iraq, Patriot Act) so I'm not sure it's so accurate anymore. I know that ''some'' political scientists call them right wing but I wonder how general? At any rate, I put the <nowiki>{{fact}}</nowiki> tag in there for now; I have no contrary sources to provide which would allow me to remove the statment entirely

PS: This article is in major need of organization and citations. I might start on this in the next couple days [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 15:53, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

*It is not generally considered "right", and hasn't in at least two decades, maybe more. Although Liberterians espouse some ideas (mainly Domestic Policy issues) many of their beliefs more aptly fit into what is now considered Liberal, especially in the Foreign Policy areas. Most favor a more pure form of Democaracy than is available in any government now established. --[[User:TK|Sysop-TK]] [[User_talk:TK|--Talk 2 Me]] 17:40, 29 July 2007 (EDT)

There are a lot of overlaps on economic issues, obviously, but libertarians are far more "principled", whereas conservatives tend to determine actions on a case by case basis. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 17:44, 29 July 2007 (EDT)

:Oh you are preaching to the choir :) I'm very familiar with the ideological stance, just not as clear on how you fit them on the right/left scale (as a libertarian myself I have much animosity towards the one axis system). But no matter anyway, Andy removed the statement I was talking about. [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Libertarianism&diff=236312&oldid=235195] [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 17:57, 29 July 2007 (EDT)

== Aquinas a Whig maybe but not a libertarian ==

There's an argument to be made for Aquinas and the Whig theory of consent of the governed [http://religionandliberty.blogspot.com/2005/09/aquinasfirst-whig-novaks-catholic-whig.html see for details] but that has nothing to do with libertarianism, so I'm dropping the reference. For Aquinas liberty is not the highest good, political or otherwise. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 14:20, 17 November 2008 (EST)

== Notable Libertarians ==
I am really unsure if most of these individuals and groups are notable. Would it be okay to reduce it to the ones that figure prominently in libertarian thought? We could add a link to Category:Libertarians for the others. [[User:Sulli|Sulli]] 12:13, 5 December 2008 (EST)
::yes, we should be especially careful about historical figures. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 12:19, 5 December 2008 (EST)
:::A lot of the minor celebrities, however, don't really seem too notable. That might just be me though. [[User:Sulli|Sulli]] 12:49, 5 December 2008 (EST)

== Reagan Quote in Bold? ==
Does the Reagan quote have to be in bold? It makes it seem like it is biased. --[[User:Mjbauer95|Mjbauer95]] 23:43, 27 March 2010 (EDT)

== Reagan Quote ==

The Ronald Reagan quote is entirely too long to be in the introduction. I think the quote should either be abbreviated or moved to a different part of the article where it is more appropriate. I don't know which course of action is best, so I'm leaving it up to debate for now. [[User:ChrisGT90|ChrisGT90]] 11:30, 13 July 2010 (EDT)

Libertarianism

2010-07-13T15:28:11Z

ChrisGT90: grammar

'''Libertarianism''' is a [[Political Philosophy|political philosophy]] that believes in minimizing or entirely eliminating government interventionism in many aspects of life including economic, personal, and in foreign policy matters. Libertarians tend to oppose the rules established by traditional marriage and religious values. The [[French]] [[term]] of ''[[Laissez faire|Laissez-Faire]]'', or ''let us do'', is a term that describes some aspects of the libertarian belief. <ref>"Libertarians are neither. Unlike Liberals or Conservatives, Libertarians advocate a high degree of both personal and economic liberty. For example, Libertarians advocate freedom in economic matters, so we're in favor of lowering taxes, slashing bureaucratic regulation of business, and charitable -- rather than government -- welfare. But Libertarians are also socially tolerant. We won't demand laws or restrictions on other people who we may not agree because of personal actions or lifestyles.

Think of us as a group of people with a "live and let live" mentality and a balanced checkbook." [http://www.lp.org/article_85.shtml]</ref> Libertarianism tends to emphasize a form of individual ''liberty'', and tends to support rights of private property.

The first systematic libertarian was [[Herbert Spencer]] (1820-1903), an English political philosopher whose books such as ''The Man Versus the State'' (1884) had a major impact in Europe and America in the late 19th century.<ref>Chris Matthew Sciabarra, "The First Libertarian," ''Liberty'' (Aug 1999) [http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sciabarra/essays/spencer.htm online] </ref> The chief American representative was [[Yale]] professor [[William Graham Sumner]].

[[Ronald Reagan]] stated in 1975, "I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism....The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is....Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals."<ref> see [http://www.reason.com/news/show/29318.html "Inside Ronald Reagan: A Reason Interview" (July 1975)]</ref>

== Libertarian Philosophy ==

Libertarianism is best summed up in the Non-Aggression Principle, which states that government (or "private police agencies" in the anarcho-capitalist variant) should only exist to protect life, liberty, and property from force and fraud.

Libertarianism is closely related to liberalism, if this word is interpreted according to its original meaning of [[classical liberal|classical liberalism]]. Libertarians in America tend to be [[liberal]] on social issues but [[conservative]] on economic issues. Libertarians generally oppose government regulation of drugs, prostitution, and marriage (including bans of [[same-sex marriage]]. The Libertarian Party officially supports legalized [[abortion]], however, libertarians themselves are divided on the issue, since government protection from force depends on the person hood of the unborn baby (or fetus). They oppose restrictions on [[pornography]]. However, they also oppose [[universal health care]], [[taxes]] and the [[welfare state]]. They are strong supporters of [[school choice]], and oppose continuing the [[public school]] system. Some libertarians support [[school vouchers]], while others are skeptical due to the issue of government influence over [[private education]].

Libertarians support an expansive view of liberty as the proper basis for organizing civil society. They tend to define liberty as the freedom to do whatever one wishes up to the point that one's behavior begins to interfere with another's person or property through coercive means. At the point of interference, each party would become subject to certain principled rules for adjudicating disputes, generally accepting that one who has demonstrated a proven lack of respect for the rights of others should be subject to sanctions, including possible constraints on their freedom. They believe that liberty is the right of every individual.

Libertarians generally defend the ideal of freedom from the perspective of how little one is constrained by authority, i.e., how much one is allowed to do (also referred to as negative liberty). This ideal is distinguished from a view of freedom focused on how much one is able to do (also called positive liberty).

== Libertarian Factions ==

Libertarians tend to use the word "libertarian" (small "l") to refer to the philosophy, and "Libertarian" (capital "L") to refer to the party. Thus, more libertarians exist than members of the [[Libertarian Party]]. Two general factions exist in the libertarian movement. The first are those libertarians who apply the principles of right to person and property to an absolute. They believe that no person, group, or government is above the right to violate these two things. They thus believe that government itself is illegitimate because it violates person and property. These libertarians subscribe to [[anarcho-capitalism]], as first named by [[Murray N. Rothbard]]. They believe that law and security can be handled by private means in the free market. The other faction believes in a very limited government. They are often referred to as [[Minarchism|minarchists]]. Libertarian minarchists want the state to only enforce law and order but generally nothing else. [[Ayn Rand]] was a minarchist.

Libertarians tend to view liberalism as a philosophy advocating less government interference in private morality and more government control of business, and view conservatism as a philosophy advocating more government interference in private morality and less government control of business, while they view libertarianism as advocating less government control in all areas. However, there have been fusionist attempts to mix libertarianism and with social conservatism. This is noted in particular by [[paleolibertarianism|paleolibertarians]]. They believe that social conservatism is a natural entity in a free society, but do not believe that it can be enforced by state interventionism.

== Libertarian Thought in America ==

While there are libertarian factions within the [[Democratic]] and [[Republican]] [[parties]], neither party is particularly well aligned with libertarian thought. While the Republican Party sometimes adopts libertarian-sounding rhetoric of small government in economic affairs, many libertarians see it as being a force that has increased government interventionism in these affairs. Libertarians generally, for example, are opposed to the [[USA PATRIOT Act]], which they believe increases government power and removes protections on the liberty and privacy of the public. Most conservatives, on the other hand, view it as a necessary government program and believe security to be more important than personal liberty and privacy. Libertarians point out that such a view contradicts those of the founding fathers, such as Benjamin Franklin, who summarized it most eloquently, "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Libertarians are also generally opposed to the [[Iraq War]], unlike the majority of conservatives.

While all libertarians agree in general on the principles of the desirability of maximizing individual liberty and avoiding excessive government interference with the operation of the free market, individual libertarians have opinions that differ wildly within these general principles.

The libertarian movement generally praises the [[United States Constitution]], regarding it as the proper scope of the national government. They believe that the Democratic and Republican parties have overstepped constitutional limits. Anarcho-capitalist libertarians, on the other hand, view the implementation of the constitution as the very reason the national government is the size it is today.

== Notable Libertarians ==
Libertarian-oriented writers include [[Frédéric Bastiat]], [[William Leggett]], [[John Stuart Mill]], [[Henry David Thoreau]], [[Lysander Spooner]], [[Herbert Spencer]], [[William Graham Sumner]], [[Carl Menger]], [[Ludwig von Mises]], Rose Wilder Lane, [[Albert Jay Nock]], [[Henry Hazlett]], and [[Isabel Paterson]].

The most influential libertarian of the 20th century was [[Milton Friedman]] (1912-2006), a leader of the [[Chicago School of Economics]].

*[[Ron Paul]], 1988 Libertarian Party and 2008 Republican Party presidential candidate. Ron Paul is considered to be of the Constitutionalist and [[paleolibertarianism|paleolibertarian]] schools of libertarian thought.
*The psychiatrist Thomas Szasz, opponent of the therapeutic state and compulsory mental institutionalization.
*Nobel Laureate economists [[Milton Friedman]], [[F.A. Hayek]], [[Ronald Coase]], Gary Becker, James Buchanan, [[George Stigler]], and Vernon Smith.
*The novelist [[Ayn Rand]] advocated a philosophy of ''Objectivism'', embodying some libertarian thought, although differing from libertarianism in many ways. Some of her novels, such as ''Atlas Shrugged'', have become icons of some people in the libertarian movement, while others find her materialism and atheism incompatible with moral ethics and natural rights and law.
*[[Robert LeFevre]], significant in promoting libertarian philosophy in the 1950s and 1960s before it was a well-defined movement, with his "Freedom School" seminars on political and economic philosophy.
*[[Karl Hess]], speechwriter for [[Barry Goldwater]] credited with penning Goldwater's famous 1964 statement "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice". Hess later became a major figure in the Libertarian Party.
*[[Murray N. Rothbard]] was nicknamed "Mr. Libertarian." He brought to life the anarcho-capitalist movement. Rothbard was an economist of the [[Austrian School of Economics|Austrian School]].
*[[Samuel Edward Konkin III]], a significant figure in 1970s libertarianism, whose influence waned considerably after the rise of the Libertarian Party as he opposed political parties and voting as being against libertarian principles. He proposed instead a purely marketplace-based route to a free society, such as [[tax resistance]] and doing business "off the books".
*[[Robert A. Heinlein]], science fiction author, whose 1966 novel ''The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress'' was an influence on the movement.
*[[L. Neil Smith]], [[J. Neil Schulman]], and [[Brad Linaweaver]], science fiction writers.
*Several popular financial writers including [[Harry Browne]] and [[Howard J. Ruff]]. Browne would later run for President, twice, on the Libertarian Party ticket. Ruff declared his political philosophy as libertarian but as a socially conservative [[Mormon]] made an exception on issues like abortion and prostitution, where he disagreed with the libertarian view.
*[[Penn and Teller]], stage magicians turned libertarian evangelicals preaching [[atheism]] and promoting libertarian philosophies, including controversial positions such as legalization of prostitution and drugs in their Showtime series, which sports a name that cannot for reasons of good taste be expressed here.
*The Canadian rock band [[Rush]], which has been together since 1968, often explores libertarian themes in their lyrics, like in "Free Will", "Tom Sawyer" and "Something for Nothing". Drummer and Lyricist [[Neil Peart]] claims to be a "left leaning libertarian." <ref>[http://www.theadvocates.org/celebrities/neil-peart.html]</ref>,
*Humorist Dave Barry, actor/comedian Drew Carey, actor Denis Leary, former MTV VJ Lisa "Kennedy" Montgomery, actor Kurt Russell, investigative reporter [[John Stossel]], and the late rocker Frank Zappa have all referred to themselves as being aligned with or openly supporting the Libertarian Party.
*Trey Parker and Matt Stone, the creators of [[South Park]], proclaimed that they are libertarians. While South Park often offend conservative positions like religion, are vulgar, and support evolution they also make fun of liberals positions such as political correctness and environmentalism. <ref>[http://www.reason.com/news/show/116787.html] Parker and Stone, Reason Magazine</ref>. The phrases "South Park Conservative" (the name of a book) and "South Park Republican" are used to describe the followers of these beliefs.
*[[Ed Clark]], the Libertarian Party's 1980 nominee for President. Clark obtained the highest popular vote percentage to date for a Libertarian candidate.

== External links ==
* [http://www.faqs.org/faqs/libertarian/faq/ Libertarian FAQ]
* [http://dmoz.org/Society/Politics/Liberalism/Libertarianism/ Open Directory libertarian links ]
* [http://chelm.freeyellow.com/black_index.html Black Libertarians]
* [http://libertarianwiki.org/Main_Page Libertarian Wiki]
* [http://www.l4l.org/ Libertarians for Life]
* [http://www.independent.org/ The Independent Institute]
* [http://www.mises.org/ Ludwig von Mises Institute]
* [http://www.fee.org/ Foundation for Economic Education]

== See also ==
* [[Herbert Spencer]]
* [[Democratic Freedom Caucus]]
* [[Republican Liberty Caucus]]
==Further reading==
* Boaz, David. '' The Libertarian Reader: Classic and Contemporary Writings from Lao Tzu to Milton Friedman'' (1998) [http://www.amazon.com/Libertarian-Reader-Contemporary-Writings-Friedman/dp/0684847671/ref=sr_1_18?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223323253&sr=8-18 excerpt and text search]
* Doherty, Brian. ''Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement'' (2008) [http://www.amazon.com/Radicals-Capitalism-Freewheeling-American-Libertarian/dp/1586485725/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259466101&sr=1-2 excerpt and text search]
* Hamowy, Ronald, ed. ''The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism'' (Sage, 2008), 644pp, sponsored by the Cato Institute; [http://www.sage-ereference.com/PublicBrowse.html Online at some academic libraries] also [http://books.google.com/books?id=yxNgXs3TkJYC&dq=intitle:Encyclopedia+intitle:of+intitle:Libertarianism&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&num=30&as_brr=0 excerpt and text search]
* Murray, Charles. ''What It Means to Be a Libertarian'' (1997) [http://www.amazon.com/What-Means-Libertarian-Charles-Murray/dp/0767900391/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223322878&sr=8-16 excerpt and text search]
* Tilman, Rick. ''Ideology and Utopia in the Social Philosophy of the Libertarian Economists'' (2001) [http://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Libertarian-Economists-Contributions-Economics/dp/0313315582/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223322878&sr=8-5 excerpt and text search]

== References ==
<references/>
[[Category:Libertarianism]]
[[category:Tax Revolts]]

Libertarianism

2010-07-13T15:27:18Z

ChrisGT90: Libertarians aren't amoral...

'''Libertarianism''' is a [[Political Philosophy|political philosophy]] that believes in minimizing or entirely eliminating government interventionism in many aspects of life; including economic, personal and in foreign policy matters. Libertarians tend to oppose the rules established by traditional marriage and religious values. The [[French]] [[term]] of ''[[Laissez faire|Laissez-Faire]]'', or ''let us do'', is a term that describes some aspects of the libertarian belief. <ref>"Libertarians are neither. Unlike Liberals or Conservatives, Libertarians advocate a high degree of both personal and economic liberty. For example, Libertarians advocate freedom in economic matters, so we're in favor of lowering taxes, slashing bureaucratic regulation of business, and charitable -- rather than government -- welfare. But Libertarians are also socially tolerant. We won't demand laws or restrictions on other people who we may not agree because of personal actions or lifestyles.

Think of us as a group of people with a "live and let live" mentality and a balanced checkbook." [http://www.lp.org/article_85.shtml]</ref> Libertarianism tends to emphasize a form of individual ''liberty'', and tends to support rights of private property.

The first systematic libertarian was [[Herbert Spencer]] (1820-1903), an English political philosopher whose books such as ''The Man Versus the State'' (1884) had a major impact in Europe and America in the late 19th century.<ref>Chris Matthew Sciabarra, "The First Libertarian," ''Liberty'' (Aug 1999) [http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sciabarra/essays/spencer.htm online] </ref> The chief American representative was [[Yale]] professor [[William Graham Sumner]].

[[Ronald Reagan]] stated in 1975, "I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism....The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is....Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals."<ref> see [http://www.reason.com/news/show/29318.html "Inside Ronald Reagan: A Reason Interview" (July 1975)]</ref>

== Libertarian Philosophy ==

Libertarianism is best summed up in the Non-Aggression Principle, which states that government (or "private police agencies" in the anarcho-capitalist variant) should only exist to protect life, liberty, and property from force and fraud.

Libertarianism is closely related to liberalism, if this word is interpreted according to its original meaning of [[classical liberal|classical liberalism]]. Libertarians in America tend to be [[liberal]] on social issues but [[conservative]] on economic issues. Libertarians generally oppose government regulation of drugs, prostitution, and marriage (including bans of [[same-sex marriage]]. The Libertarian Party officially supports legalized [[abortion]], however, libertarians themselves are divided on the issue, since government protection from force depends on the person hood of the unborn baby (or fetus). They oppose restrictions on [[pornography]]. However, they also oppose [[universal health care]], [[taxes]] and the [[welfare state]]. They are strong supporters of [[school choice]], and oppose continuing the [[public school]] system. Some libertarians support [[school vouchers]], while others are skeptical due to the issue of government influence over [[private education]].

Libertarians support an expansive view of liberty as the proper basis for organizing civil society. They tend to define liberty as the freedom to do whatever one wishes up to the point that one's behavior begins to interfere with another's person or property through coercive means. At the point of interference, each party would become subject to certain principled rules for adjudicating disputes, generally accepting that one who has demonstrated a proven lack of respect for the rights of others should be subject to sanctions, including possible constraints on their freedom. They believe that liberty is the right of every individual.

Libertarians generally defend the ideal of freedom from the perspective of how little one is constrained by authority, i.e., how much one is allowed to do (also referred to as negative liberty). This ideal is distinguished from a view of freedom focused on how much one is able to do (also called positive liberty).

== Libertarian Factions ==

Libertarians tend to use the word "libertarian" (small "l") to refer to the philosophy, and "Libertarian" (capital "L") to refer to the party. Thus, more libertarians exist than members of the [[Libertarian Party]]. Two general factions exist in the libertarian movement. The first are those libertarians who apply the principles of right to person and property to an absolute. They believe that no person, group, or government is above the right to violate these two things. They thus believe that government itself is illegitimate because it violates person and property. These libertarians subscribe to [[anarcho-capitalism]], as first named by [[Murray N. Rothbard]]. They believe that law and security can be handled by private means in the free market. The other faction believes in a very limited government. They are often referred to as [[Minarchism|minarchists]]. Libertarian minarchists want the state to only enforce law and order but generally nothing else. [[Ayn Rand]] was a minarchist.

Libertarians tend to view liberalism as a philosophy advocating less government interference in private morality and more government control of business, and view conservatism as a philosophy advocating more government interference in private morality and less government control of business, while they view libertarianism as advocating less government control in all areas. However, there have been fusionist attempts to mix libertarianism and with social conservatism. This is noted in particular by [[paleolibertarianism|paleolibertarians]]. They believe that social conservatism is a natural entity in a free society, but do not believe that it can be enforced by state interventionism.

== Libertarian Thought in America ==

While there are libertarian factions within the [[Democratic]] and [[Republican]] [[parties]], neither party is particularly well aligned with libertarian thought. While the Republican Party sometimes adopts libertarian-sounding rhetoric of small government in economic affairs, many libertarians see it as being a force that has increased government interventionism in these affairs. Libertarians generally, for example, are opposed to the [[USA PATRIOT Act]], which they believe increases government power and removes protections on the liberty and privacy of the public. Most conservatives, on the other hand, view it as a necessary government program and believe security to be more important than personal liberty and privacy. Libertarians point out that such a view contradicts those of the founding fathers, such as Benjamin Franklin, who summarized it most eloquently, "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Libertarians are also generally opposed to the [[Iraq War]], unlike the majority of conservatives.

While all libertarians agree in general on the principles of the desirability of maximizing individual liberty and avoiding excessive government interference with the operation of the free market, individual libertarians have opinions that differ wildly within these general principles.

The libertarian movement generally praises the [[United States Constitution]], regarding it as the proper scope of the national government. They believe that the Democratic and Republican parties have overstepped constitutional limits. Anarcho-capitalist libertarians, on the other hand, view the implementation of the constitution as the very reason the national government is the size it is today.

== Notable Libertarians ==
Libertarian-oriented writers include [[Frédéric Bastiat]], [[William Leggett]], [[John Stuart Mill]], [[Henry David Thoreau]], [[Lysander Spooner]], [[Herbert Spencer]], [[William Graham Sumner]], [[Carl Menger]], [[Ludwig von Mises]], Rose Wilder Lane, [[Albert Jay Nock]], [[Henry Hazlett]], and [[Isabel Paterson]].

The most influential libertarian of the 20th century was [[Milton Friedman]] (1912-2006), a leader of the [[Chicago School of Economics]].

*[[Ron Paul]], 1988 Libertarian Party and 2008 Republican Party presidential candidate. Ron Paul is considered to be of the Constitutionalist and [[paleolibertarianism|paleolibertarian]] schools of libertarian thought.
*The psychiatrist Thomas Szasz, opponent of the therapeutic state and compulsory mental institutionalization.
*Nobel Laureate economists [[Milton Friedman]], [[F.A. Hayek]], [[Ronald Coase]], Gary Becker, James Buchanan, [[George Stigler]], and Vernon Smith.
*The novelist [[Ayn Rand]] advocated a philosophy of ''Objectivism'', embodying some libertarian thought, although differing from libertarianism in many ways. Some of her novels, such as ''Atlas Shrugged'', have become icons of some people in the libertarian movement, while others find her materialism and atheism incompatible with moral ethics and natural rights and law.
*[[Robert LeFevre]], significant in promoting libertarian philosophy in the 1950s and 1960s before it was a well-defined movement, with his "Freedom School" seminars on political and economic philosophy.
*[[Karl Hess]], speechwriter for [[Barry Goldwater]] credited with penning Goldwater's famous 1964 statement "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice". Hess later became a major figure in the Libertarian Party.
*[[Murray N. Rothbard]] was nicknamed "Mr. Libertarian." He brought to life the anarcho-capitalist movement. Rothbard was an economist of the [[Austrian School of Economics|Austrian School]].
*[[Samuel Edward Konkin III]], a significant figure in 1970s libertarianism, whose influence waned considerably after the rise of the Libertarian Party as he opposed political parties and voting as being against libertarian principles. He proposed instead a purely marketplace-based route to a free society, such as [[tax resistance]] and doing business "off the books".
*[[Robert A. Heinlein]], science fiction author, whose 1966 novel ''The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress'' was an influence on the movement.
*[[L. Neil Smith]], [[J. Neil Schulman]], and [[Brad Linaweaver]], science fiction writers.
*Several popular financial writers including [[Harry Browne]] and [[Howard J. Ruff]]. Browne would later run for President, twice, on the Libertarian Party ticket. Ruff declared his political philosophy as libertarian but as a socially conservative [[Mormon]] made an exception on issues like abortion and prostitution, where he disagreed with the libertarian view.
*[[Penn and Teller]], stage magicians turned libertarian evangelicals preaching [[atheism]] and promoting libertarian philosophies, including controversial positions such as legalization of prostitution and drugs in their Showtime series, which sports a name that cannot for reasons of good taste be expressed here.
*The Canadian rock band [[Rush]], which has been together since 1968, often explores libertarian themes in their lyrics, like in "Free Will", "Tom Sawyer" and "Something for Nothing". Drummer and Lyricist [[Neil Peart]] claims to be a "left leaning libertarian." <ref>[http://www.theadvocates.org/celebrities/neil-peart.html]</ref>,
*Humorist Dave Barry, actor/comedian Drew Carey, actor Denis Leary, former MTV VJ Lisa "Kennedy" Montgomery, actor Kurt Russell, investigative reporter [[John Stossel]], and the late rocker Frank Zappa have all referred to themselves as being aligned with or openly supporting the Libertarian Party.
*Trey Parker and Matt Stone, the creators of [[South Park]], proclaimed that they are libertarians. While South Park often offend conservative positions like religion, are vulgar, and support evolution they also make fun of liberals positions such as political correctness and environmentalism. <ref>[http://www.reason.com/news/show/116787.html] Parker and Stone, Reason Magazine</ref>. The phrases "South Park Conservative" (the name of a book) and "South Park Republican" are used to describe the followers of these beliefs.
*[[Ed Clark]], the Libertarian Party's 1980 nominee for President. Clark obtained the highest popular vote percentage to date for a Libertarian candidate.

== External links ==
* [http://www.faqs.org/faqs/libertarian/faq/ Libertarian FAQ]
* [http://dmoz.org/Society/Politics/Liberalism/Libertarianism/ Open Directory libertarian links ]
* [http://chelm.freeyellow.com/black_index.html Black Libertarians]
* [http://libertarianwiki.org/Main_Page Libertarian Wiki]
* [http://www.l4l.org/ Libertarians for Life]
* [http://www.independent.org/ The Independent Institute]
* [http://www.mises.org/ Ludwig von Mises Institute]
* [http://www.fee.org/ Foundation for Economic Education]

== See also ==
* [[Herbert Spencer]]
* [[Democratic Freedom Caucus]]
* [[Republican Liberty Caucus]]
==Further reading==
* Boaz, David. '' The Libertarian Reader: Classic and Contemporary Writings from Lao Tzu to Milton Friedman'' (1998) [http://www.amazon.com/Libertarian-Reader-Contemporary-Writings-Friedman/dp/0684847671/ref=sr_1_18?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223323253&sr=8-18 excerpt and text search]
* Doherty, Brian. ''Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement'' (2008) [http://www.amazon.com/Radicals-Capitalism-Freewheeling-American-Libertarian/dp/1586485725/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259466101&sr=1-2 excerpt and text search]
* Hamowy, Ronald, ed. ''The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism'' (Sage, 2008), 644pp, sponsored by the Cato Institute; [http://www.sage-ereference.com/PublicBrowse.html Online at some academic libraries] also [http://books.google.com/books?id=yxNgXs3TkJYC&dq=intitle:Encyclopedia+intitle:of+intitle:Libertarianism&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&num=30&as_brr=0 excerpt and text search]
* Murray, Charles. ''What It Means to Be a Libertarian'' (1997) [http://www.amazon.com/What-Means-Libertarian-Charles-Murray/dp/0767900391/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223322878&sr=8-16 excerpt and text search]
* Tilman, Rick. ''Ideology and Utopia in the Social Philosophy of the Libertarian Economists'' (2001) [http://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Libertarian-Economists-Contributions-Economics/dp/0313315582/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223322878&sr=8-5 excerpt and text search]

== References ==
<references/>
[[Category:Libertarianism]]
[[category:Tax Revolts]]

Political Spectrum

2010-07-13T04:21:42Z

ChrisGT90: /* Modern use */ spelling

The idea of a '''political spectrum''' stems from deliberative bodies in which groups of like-minded men would sit on opposite sides of a chamber, which gave rise to terms like "left" and "right" being attached to the views of the men on those sides.

The earliest known left-right classification was that of the [[National Assembly]] in [[France]] just before the [[French Revolution]]. Members who supported the monarchy, would sit towards the right. Those who had been offended by their own party would frequently stand up and walk over to the other side of the hall in order to make a political statement.

Historian [[Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.]] has said the spectrum theory was "adequate to the political simplicities of the nineteenth century, when the Right meant those who wished to preserve the existing order and the Left meant those who wished to change it. But the twentieth century, here as elsewhere, introduced new ambiguities." <ref>[http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/50s/schlesinger-notrightleft.html Not Right, Not Left, But a Vital Center], [[Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.]], ''New York Times Magazine'', April 4, 1948.</ref> In modern times, the left emphasizes [[collectivism|collective]] wisdom as a guiding force (see [[planned economy]]), while the right emphasizes individual rights (see [[ideological spectrum]]).

This is in stark contrast to the liberal (and Communist) view which associates the "right" with Fascism and the "left" with Communism:

*The rise of fascism and communism illustrated vividly the fallacies of the linear conception of Right and Left. In certain basic respects - a totalitarian state structure, a single party, a leader, a secret police, a hatred of political, cultural and intellectual freedom - fascism and communism are clearly more like each other than they are like anything in between. [http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/50s/schlesinger-notrightleft.html]

__TOC__
==Definitions==

The original definition referred to Church and state issues from the late 18th century Enlightenment period. At its root was faith vs. rationalism, or the Church vs. [[secularism]]. The so-called "right", defined as "traditional interests" referred to the Church & monarchy who ruled by the [[divine right of kings]], and the so-called "left" constituted secular elements challenging the Church's long-held influence over civil government. These definitions have always been problematic when attempting to assign western notions of "left and right" to societies which traditionally have no conception of separation of church and states, such as in Islam <ref>[http://nobsopus.blogspot.com/1993/11/political-career-of-muhammad.html The Political Career of Muhammad], Arnold Toynbee, ''A Study of History'' Annex II TO III. C. (ii) (b) p. 466.</ref> or Czarist Russia.

The monarchy and titled nobility became known as the "right"; this idea however has been disabused in the United States where a landlord class of titled nobles never existed, and in fact is specifically prohibited by the U.S. Constitution. Hence Europeans today, based upon their own cultural idioms and history, have an extremely discolored view of what the "American right" is.

Another common misperception is, while the "right" has become identified with defending and advocating [[Judeo-Christian]] values, [[secular]] [[atheist]] mass movements such as [[National Socialism]] are often either mistakenly or deliberately labeled as [[right-wing]]. This fallacy has been particularly well illustrated in our own time by examining the modern [[fascist]] [[Ba'athist]] [[regime]]s of [[Iraq]] and [[Syria]]. Both have their roots in the anti-clerical influences of Western [[socialism]] against fundamentalist [[Islam]], and inherently promote "change" against oppressive religious [[theocracy]].<ref>[http://www.ozconservative.com/whatisconsshort.htm What is conservatism?]Mark Richardson</ref>

The "left" is often described as advocating "change" of traditional systems and institutions of a society, however the leftist regimes of [[Cuba]] and [[North Korea]] stoutly resist changes other leftist regimes abandoned 20 years ago after seven decades of stagnation and exploitation of the oppressed common people by a privileged leftist ruling elite.

While the left may challenge the authority, legitimacy and even existence of a supreme power, the right is beholden to traditional faith-based cultural attitudes.

==Origins==
At the time of the [[French Revolution]], when the existing order, or ''[[Ancien Regime]]'' had been overthrown, the idea of [[nationalism]] did not exist throughout most of [[Europe]]. During the violent years of 1793 and 1794 in France, a love of the ''Patrie'', or the nation, was cultivated to replace the foundations upon which [[society]] had been built under the old order. Under the stimulus of this movement for national unification, Catholicism was faced with the competition of a worship of national patriotism. [[Nationalism]] grew out of this new will to construct and shape the political community. <ref>John Hall Stewart, ''A Documentary Survey of the French Revolution'' (Macmillan, New York, 1963). </ref><ref>David A. Bell, ''The Cult of the Nation in France: Inventing Nationalism, 1680-1800'', (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001). [http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2005/is_1_37/ai_109668489]</ref>

This transmutation of a love of God to a love of "the people" as being the basis for a social and political order spread across Europe and other parts of the world during the nineteenth century. In Germany it became a recognition and consciousness of "''das volk''", later in Russia it was a dedication to the "''narodny''". By the mid-nineteenth century, Socialism as a doctrine sought to overthrow the existing order of society, the Church and aristocracy, by promoting atheism and nationalism. The basic tenet was to replace the individual's commitment to love and serve God with the individual's commitment to love and serve the collective society.

Socialism has always been [[authoritarian]] from its beginnings. It began as a reaction against the [[classical liberalism]] of the French Revolution. The French writers who laid its foundation had no doubt that their ideas could be put into practice only by a strong dictatorial government. The first of modern planners, Henri de Saint-Simon, predicted those who did not obey his proposed [[economic planning]] boards would be ‘treated as cattle.’ <ref>[http://www.iea.org.uk/files/upld-publication43pdf?.pdf ''Road to Serfdom'',] Friedrich A. Hayek, Reader's Digest Condensed Version, April 1945, pg. 39.</ref>

Nationalism can be defined as pride in one's native language and culture. Socialist theoreticians, wanting to overthrow the exisitng order, stirred up nationalist resentment among the minorities within the larger German, Russian, and Austro-Hungarian Empires. The reaction among Austrian Socialists was quite different. A solution to the problem of nationalities became policy in Austria-Hungary on two levels: territorial autonomy for territorial minorities, and "personal autonomy" for members of minorities dispersed among peoples of different languages and cultures. Minorities were to be granted the right to have their own schools and their own institutions. Many minorities realized it was better to remain subjects of the supra-national Hapsburg state than to be subordinate to repressive policies and actions of other national groups. Austrian Socialists rejected the idea of [[national liberation movement]]s and the dissolution of the Hapsburg Monarchy into independent national units. <ref name="talmon">J. L. Talmon, ''The Unique and the Universal'', Secker & Warburg, London 1965. </ref>

By the twentieth century, [[V.I. Lenin]] insisted on the right of subjugated peoples to break away from the great empires. Once the [[Bolsheviks]] were in power in Russia however, any attempt on the part of the subjugated peoples to break away from the Socialist Union of nations was considered [[counter-revolutionary]] activity. <ref name="talmon" />

[[Friedrich Hayek]] of the London School of Economics and Political Science writing in the Spring of 1933 <ref>Friedrich A. Hayek, ''Memorandum on Nazi-Socialism spring of 1933''</ref>
remarked,
{{Cquote|Nothing could be more superficial than to consider the forces which dominate the Germany of today as reactionary — in the sense that they want a return to the social and economic order of 1914. The persecution of the Marxists, and of democrats in general, tends to obscure the fundamental fact that National Socialism is a genuine socialist movement, whose leading ideas are the final fruit of the antiliberal tendencies which have been steadily gaining ground in Germany since the later part of the Bismarckian era, and which led the majority of the German intelligentsia first to "socialism of the chair" and later to Marxism in its social-democratic or communist form. <ref>[http://chronicle.com/weekly/v53/i30/30b00401.htm 'The Road to Serfdom'], The Chronicle of Higher Education, ''The Chronicle Review'', Volume 53, Issue 30, Page B4, March 30, 2007. </ref>}}

==Modern use==
The left/right scale is a misleading way of comparing political systems. People use the left/right approach out of habit, but it leads to confusion. For example, [[fascism]] is often placed on the right and [[socialism]] on the left even though fascism and socialism have more similarities with each other than anything that falls between them. Indeed, the left/right scale is just an obsolete reference to the seating arrangement of the French Assembly in the 1790's.<ref>[http://www.lairdwilcox.com/news/nolanchart.html Beyond Left/Right] by [http://www.theadvocates.org/celebrities/marshall-fritz.html Marshall Fritz], 1987. Retrieved from lairdwilcox.com 05/25/07. </ref> In 1970, Denver advertising executive David Nolan invented the Nolan Chart to overcome the inherently illogical weakness of the outdated left/right political spectrum.<ref>[http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz-faq.html#faq02 Why did the Advocates create the World's Smallest Political Quiz?] Retrieved from theadvocates.org 06/01/07.</ref>
[[Image:Nolan-chart.svg|right|thumb|The Nolan Chart overcomes the weaknesses of the outdated Left/Right political spectrum.]]

The "economic" category includes what you do as a producer and consumer. These are your actions that can be described in money. Examples are earning a wage, buying a car, renting a motorhome.

The "civil" (or personal) category includes what you do in relationships and expressing yourself. These actions are not measured in money. Examples are the way you worship God, or don't; what books or magazines give you pleasure; your personal tradeoffs between today's fun and tomorrow's health. The Bill of Rights is aimed at your freedoms in this category.

Nolan saw how political families can be understood by the degree of individual choice they offer in these categories. You can use this improved way of mapping political thought to better understand your local, national and international political environment.

Left/liberals like personal choice in civil matters and central decision-making in economics. They want government to serve the disadvantaged and promote equality. Left/liberals place high value on good intentions. They accept diversity in social behavior but seek more equality in economics. They work with libertarians in defending civil liberties and with socialists in advancing economic central planning.

Right/conservatives like personal choice in economics and central decision-making in civil matters. They want government to defend the community from threats to its moral fiber. Right/conservatives place high value on laws and legislation. They accept diversity in economics but seek similarity in social behavior. They work with libertarians in defending economic freedoms and with populists in enforcing community standards in social matters.

Socialists and [[populist]]s favor central decision-making in both civil and economic matters. They believe the needs of the individual are subordinate to the needs of society. They want government to "correct wrongs." While they strongly differ on particular programs, both prefer equality in economic and personal matters.

Classical liberals/libertarians like personal choice in both civil and economic matters. They believe government's only purpose is to safeguard people from coercion and violence. They value individual responsibility and tolerance. Libertarians accept diversity in both social behavior and in economic situation.

Centrists favor selective governmental intervention and temporary affiliations with others. They take a strong stance on few issues, preferring the middle position in most matters. Centrists emphasize practical solutions to current public issues.

Furthermore, the old fashioned left-right model is fatally flawed. The model implies that if you "go too far" (i.e., are consistent) with any political idea, you end up, in some inexplicable way, at [[totalitarianism]] or anarchism, or maybe both. Pursue conservative thought to its logical extreme, according to this model, and you somehow end up at fascism, which is national socialism, or white supremacy or some other authoritarian position. If you pursue liberal thought too far, you supposedly end up at socialism or communism. This is inconsistent, and it ignores large philosophical differences between, liberalism and communism, and conservatism and fascism.

==Extreme polarization==

Dacher Keltner, assistant professor of psychology at the University of California at Berkeley, has found that people have a powerful tendency to exaggerate the views of their ideological opponents, seeing, on average, twice as much difference as actually exists. Moreover, he has turned up this “imagined [[extremism]]” in a variety of settings, including conflicts over [[abortion]] rights, the interpretation of a racial incident, the attitudes of homosexuals and Christian fundamentalists and the choices of English professors toward use of the “Western Canon” in university classes.

Partisans and nonpartisans in political disputes, Keltner's study finds, seriously overestimate the polarization between the two sides. Although a tendency to demonize one’s opponents is not a new understanding, Keltner’s work breaks new ground in being able to measure the extent of the effect by gathering hard data on actual versus perceived differences among the parties to a dispute as well as among neutral observers. <ref>Patricia McBroom, University of California, Berkeley, News Release, 1/4/97, ''Political attitudes in the U.S. are exaggerated, according to UC Berkeley psychologist in studies of “imagined Extremism.”''</ref>

==Notes==
<references/>

==See also==

* [[Nomenklatura]]
* [[Political profiling]]
[[category:political Terms]]

==External links==
*[http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~garfinkm/Spectrum.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~garfinkm/Spectrum.html&h=697&w=724&sz=181&tbnid=eAv0lAZBMDi55M:&tbnh=135&tbnw=140&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dpolitical%2Bspectrum&start=2&sa=X&oi=images&ct=image&cd=2 a 2-d view] with left-right based on US politics and a novel vertical axis

Political Spectrum

2010-07-13T04:20:19Z

ChrisGT90: /* Modern use */

The idea of a '''political spectrum''' stems from deliberative bodies in which groups of like-minded men would sit on opposite sides of a chamber, which gave rise to terms like "left" and "right" being attached to the views of the men on those sides.

The earliest known left-right classification was that of the [[National Assembly]] in [[France]] just before the [[French Revolution]]. Members who supported the monarchy, would sit towards the right. Those who had been offended by their own party would frequently stand up and walk over to the other side of the hall in order to make a political statement.

Historian [[Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.]] has said the spectrum theory was "adequate to the political simplicities of the nineteenth century, when the Right meant those who wished to preserve the existing order and the Left meant those who wished to change it. But the twentieth century, here as elsewhere, introduced new ambiguities." <ref>[http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/50s/schlesinger-notrightleft.html Not Right, Not Left, But a Vital Center], [[Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.]], ''New York Times Magazine'', April 4, 1948.</ref> In modern times, the left emphasizes [[collectivism|collective]] wisdom as a guiding force (see [[planned economy]]), while the right emphasizes individual rights (see [[ideological spectrum]]).

This is in stark contrast to the liberal (and Communist) view which associates the "right" with Fascism and the "left" with Communism:

*The rise of fascism and communism illustrated vividly the fallacies of the linear conception of Right and Left. In certain basic respects - a totalitarian state structure, a single party, a leader, a secret police, a hatred of political, cultural and intellectual freedom - fascism and communism are clearly more like each other than they are like anything in between. [http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/50s/schlesinger-notrightleft.html]

__TOC__
==Definitions==

The original definition referred to Church and state issues from the late 18th century Enlightenment period. At its root was faith vs. rationalism, or the Church vs. [[secularism]]. The so-called "right", defined as "traditional interests" referred to the Church & monarchy who ruled by the [[divine right of kings]], and the so-called "left" constituted secular elements challenging the Church's long-held influence over civil government. These definitions have always been problematic when attempting to assign western notions of "left and right" to societies which traditionally have no conception of separation of church and states, such as in Islam <ref>[http://nobsopus.blogspot.com/1993/11/political-career-of-muhammad.html The Political Career of Muhammad], Arnold Toynbee, ''A Study of History'' Annex II TO III. C. (ii) (b) p. 466.</ref> or Czarist Russia.

The monarchy and titled nobility became known as the "right"; this idea however has been disabused in the United States where a landlord class of titled nobles never existed, and in fact is specifically prohibited by the U.S. Constitution. Hence Europeans today, based upon their own cultural idioms and history, have an extremely discolored view of what the "American right" is.

Another common misperception is, while the "right" has become identified with defending and advocating [[Judeo-Christian]] values, [[secular]] [[atheist]] mass movements such as [[National Socialism]] are often either mistakenly or deliberately labeled as [[right-wing]]. This fallacy has been particularly well illustrated in our own time by examining the modern [[fascist]] [[Ba'athist]] [[regime]]s of [[Iraq]] and [[Syria]]. Both have their roots in the anti-clerical influences of Western [[socialism]] against fundamentalist [[Islam]], and inherently promote "change" against oppressive religious [[theocracy]].<ref>[http://www.ozconservative.com/whatisconsshort.htm What is conservatism?]Mark Richardson</ref>

The "left" is often described as advocating "change" of traditional systems and institutions of a society, however the leftist regimes of [[Cuba]] and [[North Korea]] stoutly resist changes other leftist regimes abandoned 20 years ago after seven decades of stagnation and exploitation of the oppressed common people by a privileged leftist ruling elite.

While the left may challenge the authority, legitimacy and even existence of a supreme power, the right is beholden to traditional faith-based cultural attitudes.

==Origins==
At the time of the [[French Revolution]], when the existing order, or ''[[Ancien Regime]]'' had been overthrown, the idea of [[nationalism]] did not exist throughout most of [[Europe]]. During the violent years of 1793 and 1794 in France, a love of the ''Patrie'', or the nation, was cultivated to replace the foundations upon which [[society]] had been built under the old order. Under the stimulus of this movement for national unification, Catholicism was faced with the competition of a worship of national patriotism. [[Nationalism]] grew out of this new will to construct and shape the political community. <ref>John Hall Stewart, ''A Documentary Survey of the French Revolution'' (Macmillan, New York, 1963). </ref><ref>David A. Bell, ''The Cult of the Nation in France: Inventing Nationalism, 1680-1800'', (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001). [http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2005/is_1_37/ai_109668489]</ref>

This transmutation of a love of God to a love of "the people" as being the basis for a social and political order spread across Europe and other parts of the world during the nineteenth century. In Germany it became a recognition and consciousness of "''das volk''", later in Russia it was a dedication to the "''narodny''". By the mid-nineteenth century, Socialism as a doctrine sought to overthrow the existing order of society, the Church and aristocracy, by promoting atheism and nationalism. The basic tenet was to replace the individual's commitment to love and serve God with the individual's commitment to love and serve the collective society.

Socialism has always been [[authoritarian]] from its beginnings. It began as a reaction against the [[classical liberalism]] of the French Revolution. The French writers who laid its foundation had no doubt that their ideas could be put into practice only by a strong dictatorial government. The first of modern planners, Henri de Saint-Simon, predicted those who did not obey his proposed [[economic planning]] boards would be ‘treated as cattle.’ <ref>[http://www.iea.org.uk/files/upld-publication43pdf?.pdf ''Road to Serfdom'',] Friedrich A. Hayek, Reader's Digest Condensed Version, April 1945, pg. 39.</ref>

Nationalism can be defined as pride in one's native language and culture. Socialist theoreticians, wanting to overthrow the exisitng order, stirred up nationalist resentment among the minorities within the larger German, Russian, and Austro-Hungarian Empires. The reaction among Austrian Socialists was quite different. A solution to the problem of nationalities became policy in Austria-Hungary on two levels: territorial autonomy for territorial minorities, and "personal autonomy" for members of minorities dispersed among peoples of different languages and cultures. Minorities were to be granted the right to have their own schools and their own institutions. Many minorities realized it was better to remain subjects of the supra-national Hapsburg state than to be subordinate to repressive policies and actions of other national groups. Austrian Socialists rejected the idea of [[national liberation movement]]s and the dissolution of the Hapsburg Monarchy into independent national units. <ref name="talmon">J. L. Talmon, ''The Unique and the Universal'', Secker & Warburg, London 1965. </ref>

By the twentieth century, [[V.I. Lenin]] insisted on the right of subjugated peoples to break away from the great empires. Once the [[Bolsheviks]] were in power in Russia however, any attempt on the part of the subjugated peoples to break away from the Socialist Union of nations was considered [[counter-revolutionary]] activity. <ref name="talmon" />

[[Friedrich Hayek]] of the London School of Economics and Political Science writing in the Spring of 1933 <ref>Friedrich A. Hayek, ''Memorandum on Nazi-Socialism spring of 1933''</ref>
remarked,
{{Cquote|Nothing could be more superficial than to consider the forces which dominate the Germany of today as reactionary — in the sense that they want a return to the social and economic order of 1914. The persecution of the Marxists, and of democrats in general, tends to obscure the fundamental fact that National Socialism is a genuine socialist movement, whose leading ideas are the final fruit of the antiliberal tendencies which have been steadily gaining ground in Germany since the later part of the Bismarckian era, and which led the majority of the German intelligentsia first to "socialism of the chair" and later to Marxism in its social-democratic or communist form. <ref>[http://chronicle.com/weekly/v53/i30/30b00401.htm 'The Road to Serfdom'], The Chronicle of Higher Education, ''The Chronicle Review'', Volume 53, Issue 30, Page B4, March 30, 2007. </ref>}}

==Modern use==
The left/right scale is a misleading way of comparing political systems. People use the left/right approach out of habit, but it leads to confusion. For example, [[fascism]] is often placed on the right and [[socialism]] on the left even though fascism and socialism have more similarities with each other than anything that falls between them. Indeed, the left/right scale is just an obsolete reference to the seating arrangement of the French Assembly in the 1790's.<ref>[http://www.lairdwilcox.com/news/nolanchart.html Beyond Left/Right] by [http://www.theadvocates.org/celebrities/marshall-fritz.html Marshall Fritz], 1987. Retrieved from lairdwilcox.com 05/25/07. </ref> In 1970, Denver advertising executive David Nolan invented the Nolan Chart to overcome the inherently illogical weakness of the outdated left/right political spectrum.<ref>[http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz-faq.html#faq02 Why did the Advocates create the World's Smallest Political Quiz?] Retrieved from theadvocates.org 06/01/07.</ref>
[[Image:Nolan-chart.svg|right|thumb|The Nolan Chart overcomes the weaknesses of the outdated Left/Right political spectrum.]]

The "economic" category includes what you do as a producer and consumer. These are your actions that can be described in money. Examples are earning a wage, buying a car, renting a motorhome.

The "Ccvil" (or personal) category includes what you do in relationships and expressing yourself. These actions are not measured in money. Examples are the way you worship God, or don't; what books or magazines give you pleasure; your personal tradeoffs between today's fun and tomorrow's health. The Bill of Rights is aimed at your freedoms in this category.

Nolan saw how political families can be understood by the degree of individual choice they offer in these categories. You can use this improved way of mapping political thought to better understand your local, national and international political environment.

Left/liberals like personal choice in civil matters and central decision-making in economics. They want government to serve the disadvantaged and promote equality. Left/liberals place high value on good intentions. They accept diversity in social behavior but seek more equality in economics. They work with libertarians in defending civil liberties and with socialists in advancing economic central planning.

Right/conservatives like personal choice in economics and central decision-making in civil matters. They want government to defend the community from threats to its moral fiber. Right/conservatives place high value on laws and legislation. They accept diversity in economics but seek similarity in social behavior. They work with libertarians in defending economic freedoms and with populists in enforcing community standards in social matters.

Socialists and [[populist]]s favor central decision-making in both civil and economic matters. They believe the needs of the individual are subordinate to the needs of society. They want government to "correct wrongs." While they strongly differ on particular programs, both prefer equality in economic and personal matters.

Classical liberals/libertarians like personal choice in both civil and economic matters. They believe government's only purpose is to safeguard people from coercion and violence. They value individual responsibility and tolerance. Libertarians accept diversity in both social behavior and in economic situation.

Centrists favor selective governmental intervention and temporary affiliations with others. They take a strong stance on few issues, preferring the middle position in most matters. Centrists emphasize practical solutions to current public issues.

Furthermore, the old fashioned left-right model is fatally flawed. The model implies that if you "go too far" (i.e., are consistent) with any political idea, you end up, in some inexplicable way, at [[totalitarianism]] or anarchism, or maybe both. Pursue conservative thought to its logical extreme, according to this model, and you somehow end up at fascism, which is national socialism, or white supremacy or some other authoritarian position. If you pursue liberal thought too far, you supposedly end up at socialism or communism. This is inconsistent, and it ignores large philosophical differences between, liberalism and communism, and conservatism and fascism.

==Extreme polarization==

Dacher Keltner, assistant professor of psychology at the University of California at Berkeley, has found that people have a powerful tendency to exaggerate the views of their ideological opponents, seeing, on average, twice as much difference as actually exists. Moreover, he has turned up this “imagined [[extremism]]” in a variety of settings, including conflicts over [[abortion]] rights, the interpretation of a racial incident, the attitudes of homosexuals and Christian fundamentalists and the choices of English professors toward use of the “Western Canon” in university classes.

Partisans and nonpartisans in political disputes, Keltner's study finds, seriously overestimate the polarization between the two sides. Although a tendency to demonize one’s opponents is not a new understanding, Keltner’s work breaks new ground in being able to measure the extent of the effect by gathering hard data on actual versus perceived differences among the parties to a dispute as well as among neutral observers. <ref>Patricia McBroom, University of California, Berkeley, News Release, 1/4/97, ''Political attitudes in the U.S. are exaggerated, according to UC Berkeley psychologist in studies of “imagined Extremism.”''</ref>

==Notes==
<references/>

==See also==

* [[Nomenklatura]]
* [[Political profiling]]
[[category:political Terms]]

==External links==
*[http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~garfinkm/Spectrum.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~garfinkm/Spectrum.html&h=697&w=724&sz=181&tbnid=eAv0lAZBMDi55M:&tbnh=135&tbnw=140&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dpolitical%2Bspectrum&start=2&sa=X&oi=images&ct=image&cd=2 a 2-d view] with left-right based on US politics and a novel vertical axis

Democratic Party

2010-07-13T04:06:51Z

ChrisGT90: Fixed template placing, moved Obama approval rating picture to where it was more relevant. (There was no way for the intro to look good with that picture, a template, and the table of contents.)

{{AmericanPoliticalParty
| party_name=Democratic Party
| party_articletitle = Democratic Party (United States)
| party_logo = [[Image:democraticpartyusalogo.png|200px]]
| website = [http://www.democrats.org www.democrats.org]
| headquarters = 430 South Capitol Street SE [[Washington, D.C.]] 20003
| chairman = [[Tim Kaine]]
| houseleader = [[Nancy Pelosi]]
| senateleader = [[Harry Reid]]
| foundation = 1832
| ideology = range from liberal to moderate
| socialpolicy = center-liberal
| colors = Blue (unofficial)
| footnotes =
}}
The '''Democratic Party''' is one of the two major political [[parties]] in the [[United States of America]]. It is the center-left party. President [[Barack Obama]] and its other leaders are generally [[liberal]], but there are powerful moderate and conservative factions, especially the [[Blue Dogs]] in Congress. The party contrasts with rival [[Republican Party]], which is generally more [[conservative]] and pro-business.

Members of the Democratic Party are known as Democrats. In the 19th century the party was sometimes called "The Democracy." Today Republicans sometimes call it the "[[Democrat Party]]" as a term of ridicule.

In the doldrums after 2000, the party roared back with major gains in 2006, which it expanded in 2008 to sweep control of the national government, and leave the GOP in a state of confusion and decline. The GOP bounced back in 2009, with near-unanimous opposition to contentions Democratic policies, especially as stimulus spending and health care reform. Polls show Obama's popularity began to sink in the summer of 2009.

The Democrats currently control the White House and have decisive majorities in the [[111th United States Congress]], together with the majority of state governorships and legislatures and control most large cities as well, while suburbs and rural areas are more likely to be in republican hands.<ref>[http://www.multistate.com/Site.nsf/Elections2006PostMaps?OpenPage Multistate.com] Post-Election 2006 Maps</ref> Polls show 50% of voters identify themselves with the Democratic Party as opposed to 35% for the Republican Party.<ref>[http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=312 Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007] Pew Research Center, 22 March 2007</ref> The Democratic-majority Congress currently has a 55% negative approval rating, with only 31% expressing approval.<ref> [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/congressional_job_approval-903.html]</ref>

==Policies and criticism==
The views of individual Democrats sometimes diverge from the party's official stance as expressed in its national platform, however unlike the Republican party, the Democratic National Committee has not allowed dissenting opinions to share the podium on matters such as abortion at National Conventions. <ref>[http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_03/005787.php] , http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_03/005787.php, March 6, 2005</ref>

===Economic policy===
[[Image:Unemployment.jpg|thumb|241px|right|''Source: Bureau of Labor Statisitcs'' [http://astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2009/07/anti-stimulus-in-pictures-any-questions.html]]]
In the field of economic policy, Democrats tend to favor high progressive taxes, more regulation, and higher government spending.

The Democratic Party has historically had ties to [[labor union|organized labor]].<ref> http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/913wopoz.asp Paying Dues - The Democrats settle up with their union bosses, [[Weekly Standard]], July 25, 2007 </ref>

The [[National Education Association]],<ref>[http://www.nea.org/index.html National Education Association homepage]</ref> the largest union of public school teachers, is a backbone of the party, supplying the largest number of delegates to its national conventions.

Democrats typically state that they want to help low-income Americans, however they usually seek to accomplish this by increasing the tax burden on the wealthiest Americans.

Since passage of the Economic Recovery Act of 2009, [[unemployment]] has increased from below 7% to slightly under 10%.

===Foreign and military policy===
According to its platform, the Democratic Party has the objective of strengthening America. Democratic national leadership has been accused of being ambivalent about terrorism<ref>[http://www.news10.net/display_story.aspx?storyid=22045 "Democrats, ACLU Outraged Over Traveler Terrorism Screening Program"] C. Johnson, Associated Press</ref> and insufficiently patriotic.<ref>[http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0112/01/smn.19.html CNN Saturday Morning News]Transcript: December 1, 2001 </ref> A poll conducted by [[Fox News]] released in October 2007 found that 1 in 5 Democrats – nearly 10 million voters – think the world will be better off if the [[United States]] were to lose the [[War in Iraq]].<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,299374,00.html Nearly 1 in 5 Democrats Say World Will Be Better Off if U.S. Loses War], FOX News Poll, October 04, 2007.</ref> The poll found this sentiment 3 to 4 times higher among Democrats than among moderate, centrist, and Republican voters.

===Education===
An organization affiliated with the [[Democratic Leadership Council]] called the [[Progressive Policy Institute]] claims a long-standing opposition to school vouchers.<ref>21st Century Schools Project Bulletin: Special Edition [http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=110&subsecID=900001&contentID=250630 ''Putting Vouchers in Perspective''], PPI E-newsletter 2 July 2002</ref> Jonathan Alter of ''Newsweek'' warned that opposition to vouchers might alienate some traditional Democratic voting blocs:
:"Can wealthy white liberals - many of whom send their kids to private school - really say to poor parents: 'We can have choices, but you must not?'...This is a glaring hypocrisy sitting at the heart of the liberal opposition to targeted vouchers… Right now, Democrats are in a highly compromised position on education."<ref>[http://www.edreform.com/index.cfm?fuseAction=newsLetter&sectionID=29&NLissueID=4&articleID=11&altCol=2 Center For Education Reform, Monthly Letter to Friends No. 75], Back to School 2002.</ref>

===Environment vs Labor===
Two other important coalition groups also find themselves in direct conflict with each other within the Democratic party coalition--[[Environmentalist]]s and Labor Unions. While environmentalists support efforts like clean air and alternative fuels, for example, this creates tension with the workers of American automobile manufactures whose jobs are threatened by environmental policies such as increasing regulations and high costs. Such policies can lead to cutbacks and layoffs. Balancing these issues is difficult because some sacrifices of interests must be made by both sides.

===Healthcare===
Democratic leaders have endorsed various [[Democratic Health Care Plans]]; the question in 2009 is whether a new trillion dollar plan can pass in a time of economic crisis.

Therefore, many argue that there may be some advantages to a universal health care system. Democrats generally regard [[universal health care]] to be a priority because of the appeal to poorer voters without any kind of [[health insurance]].

===Gay Rights===
White Democratic leaders --but not blacks or Latinos--consistently favor measures such as the establishment of [[same-sex civil union]]s. They mostly reject [[gay marriage]].

===Other Policies===
Democrats frequently support the minimum wage, workplace protections, the right of women to choose to have an [[abortion]], [[gun control]], gay marriage, and the separation of church and state.

==Religion==
In the United States, there is some correlation between religious and political affiliation, though people of all faiths and denominations can be found among the supporters of each of the main parties.

Historically [[Roman Catholic Church|Catholic]] voters have had a tendency to identify with the Democratic Party; in recent decades there has been little difference. However Catholic politicians are mostly Democrats, including Speaker of the House [[Nancy Pelosi]] and Massachusetts Senator [[Ted Kennedy]]. However, several general ideals of the Democratic Party's platform - most notably, the party's overall support for the legality of [[abortion]] - are contrary to the position of the [[Catholic Church]].

With regard to Protestants, members of [[Evangelical]] churches in recent years have voted about 70-80% Republican. However, the large majority of Democratic Party members are Protestants. One unusual feature of the Democratic Party, however, is that it draws substantial support both from committed African-American Protestants (most of whom are Baptists) and from secular and atheist voters. The strong opposition to [[homosexuality]] found among many Black Protestants contrasts strikingly with the support frequently shown by other Democrats for the [[homosexual agenda]]. One reason for this contrast could be the Democrats' strong support for minority rights.

Democrats also generally believe that religion should be separate from public life, and as such are typically supported by the ACLU. For example, in 1999 the Congress took up a bill to protect the display of the [[Ten Commandments]]. In the House of Representatives, over 3/4ths of the Democratic party members voted to remove the display.<ref>http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/06/18/gun.rollcall/ten.commandments.html</ref>. The measure did not pass the Legislature, and as a result when Justice [[Roy Moore]] posted a [[Ten Commandments]] display in his courthouse, the ACLU was able to have the display removed.

==History==
[[File:Dem-leaders.jpg|thumb|300px|Clockwise from far left: presidents Carter, Kennedy, Clinton, Wilson, Johnson, Truman, Jackson, Roosevelt]]
===First Party System===
Democrats claim the [[Thomas Jefferson]] founded their party in 1793 at the start of the [[First Party System]]. The [[Democratic-Republican Party]] was a political party established during the 1790's under the leadership of Thomas Jefferson and [[James Madison]]. It was generally called the Republican Party, but it had no relation to today's Republican Party, founded in 1854. By about 1816, the Federalist Party had broken up as a national organization. With its decline, the Democratic-Republican Party split into several groups. [[Andrew Jackson]] emerged as the candidate of one of these groups and was elected President in 1828.

===Origins===
Most historians regard Jackson's 1832 campaign organization as the beginning of today's Democratic Party. The Democratic Party itself traces its origin to Jefferson's Democratic-Republican Party.<ref>[[World Book]]</ref> A few Democratic-Republicans, such as [[John Quincy Adams]] and [[Henry Clay]], created the [[National Republican Party]]. Adams supporters called themselves National Republicans, antecedents of the Whig and later the Republican parties.<ref>William DeGregorio, ''The Complete Book of U.S. Presidents'', Gramercy 1997</ref>

The modern Democratic party was formed during 1828-34, under the national leadership of Jackson and Van Buren, with organizations in all the states comprised of local political leaders. This became the era of [[Jacksonian Democracy]]. The Jacksonians resembled the [[Jeffersonian Democracy|Jeffersonians]] especially in terms of anti-elite rhetoric of opposition to "aristocracy" (that is, wealthy old families), distrust of banks (and paper money), and faith in "the people." By his extensive use of federal [[Spoils system|patronage]], President Jackson removed old office-holders to make way for party loyalists. With the emergence of the Whig Party, the nation now had a new party system, the [[Second Party System]], which lasted until 1854.

The party held its first national convention in 1832 to choose a new running mate for Jackson; it nominated Martin Van Buren for vice president and endorsed the reelection of Jackson. Jackson easily defeated Clay in 1832. In the political realignment of 1828-32, some of Jackson's supporters from the election of 1828, especially businessmen and bankers, switched to the opposition Whig Party as Jackson crusaded against the [[Second Bank of the United States]]. The name "Democratic Party" became common by the mid-1830s.

== Jacksonian Democracy: 1832-1854 ==
[[image:donk1837.jpg|thumb|300px|1837 cartoon shows Democratic Party as donkey ]]
The new party dominated the [[Second Party System]] (as political scientists call it; historians call it "Jacksonian Democracy", 1832-54. After 1832, the Democratic Party drew support from a cross section of the country; every group was represented. However the vast majority of rich merchants, bankers and plantation owners were Whigs, as were most evangelical Protestants. The party was strongest among traditionalistic farmers, frontiersmen, unskilled workers, Irish Catholics, and local or state political leaders. It was weakest in [[New England]], where industrialization turned most factory workers and white collar workers into Whigs, but was dominant in all other regions. The key issues it promoted were opposition to elites and aristocrats, popular democracy (in terms of voting rights and access to government patronage jobs) and opposition to the [[Bank of the United States]] (Jackson vetoed its charter renewal in 1832). The policies were known as [[Jacksonian Democracy]]. [[Image:Jackson1832.jpg|thumb|300px|left]]

Banking and tariffs were the central domestic policy issues from 1828 to 1852. The Democrats favored the [[Mexican-American War]]; Whigs opposed it. Democrats attracted Catholic Irish and German immigrants and denounced anti-immigrant nativism. Both the Democrats and Whigs were divided on the issue of slavery.

In the 1830s the [[Loco-Focos]] in New York City were radically democratic, anti-monopoly, and proponents of [[laissez-faire]]. Their chief spokesman was writer [[William Leggett]]. At this time labor unions were few; some were loosely affiliated with the party.

The economy went sour in the late 1830s with Van Buren getting the blame; he lost reelection as president in 1840 to the Whig [[William Henry Harrison]]. The Democrats gained the White House back in 1844 with [[James K. Polk]]. He had a successful term, then retired. The Democratic National Committee was created in 1848 at the convention that nominated General [[Lewis Cass]], who lost to General [[Zachary Taylor]] of the Whigs. In state after state the Democrats gained small but permanent advantages over the Whigs, until by 1852 the Whig Party was fatally weakened by divisions regarding the issue of slavery and they soon vanished.

The Democratic party dominated the North from the 1840s to 1854. Northern Democrats opposed banks, criticized corporate practices, and preached the ideals of a free society. They called for rapid territorial expansion of the United States, saying that in territorial expansion lay a means for thwarting the pretensions of the [[Slave Power]].

[[Franklin Pierce]] of New Hampshire was elected president in 1852, followed by [[James Buchanan]] of Pennsylvania in 1856. They proved poor presidents who lost control of the slavery issue, and the party, as the nation broke apart and fought the [[American Civil War]].

==Third Party System: Civil War, Gilded Age: 1854-1896==
During the [[Third Party System]] (1854-1896) the Democrats became the minority in the face of the newly formed Republican Party, which controlled nearly all northern states by 1860, bringing a solid majority in the Electoral College. A powerful Republican issue was the allegation that northern Democrats, including "Doughfaces" like Pierce and Buchanan, and advocates of popular sovereignty like [[Stephen A. Douglas]] and [[Lewis Cass]], were accomplices to the [[Slave Power]]. The Republicans meant by Slave Power the conspiracy of slaveholders to seize control of the federal government and block the progress of liberty.

[[Image:DEM1860.JPG|200px|thumb|left|To vote for Douglas in Virginia, a man had to deposit the ticket in the official ballot box.]]
In 1860 the Democrats were unable to stop the election of Republican [[Abraham Lincoln]], even as they feared his election would lead to civil war. The party split in two. The northern wing nominated Douglas, and the southern wing nominated Vice President [[John C. Breckinridge]]. Douglas campaigned across the country and came in second in the popular vote, but carried only Missouri. Breckinridge carried 11 slave states.

The Republican Party was beginning a 50-year era of dominance (1858-1910). During the war, Northern Democrats divided into two factions, [[War Democrats]], who supported the military policies of President Lincoln, and [[Copperheads]], who strongly opposed them. Historian Kenneth Stampp has captured the Copperhead spirit in his depiction of Democratic Congressman [[Daniel W. Voorhees]] of Indiana:
<blockquote>There was an earthy quality in Voorhees, "the tall sycamore of the Wabash." On the stump his hot temper, passionate partisanship, and stirring eloquence made an irresistible appeal to the western Democracy. His bitter cries against protective tariffs and national banks, his intense race prejudice, his suspicion of the eastern Yankee, his devotion to personal liberty, his defense of the Constitution and state rights faithfully reflected the views of his constituents. Like other Jacksonian agrarians he resented the political and economic revolution then in progress. Voorhees idealized a way of life which he thought was being destroyed by the current rulers of his country. His bold protests against these dangerous trends made him the idol of the Democracy of the Wabash Valley.<ref>Stampp, 211.</ref></blockquote>

The Democrats lost consecutive presidential elections from 1860 through 1880 (but 1876 was in dispute); 1884 was their next victory. The Democrats were weakened by their record of opposition to the Civil War but nevertheless benefited from white Southerners' resentment of Reconstruction and consequent hostility to the Republican Party. The [[Redeemers]] gave the Democrats control of every Southern state; the disenfranchisement of black voters in most of the South took place 1890-1900. From 1880 to 1960 the "[[Solid South]]" voted Democratic in all presidential elections (except 1928). After 1900 the key election in southern states was the Democratic primary; victory in the that primary was "tantamount to election" because the GOP was so weak.

Though Republicans continued to control the White House until 1912 (except 1884 and 1892), the Democrats remained competitive in the states, especially in the mid-Atlantic and lower Midwest, and controlled the House of Representatives for most of that period. In the election of 1884, [[Grover Cleveland]], the conservative Democratic Governor of New York, won the presidency, a feat he repeated in 1892, having lost in the election of 1888.

[[Image:1893cleveland-typewriter.jpg|thumb|350px|Typewriters were new in 1893 and this Gillam cartoon from ''Puck'' shows that Cleveland can't get the Democratic "machine" to work as the keys (key politicians) won't respond to his efforts.]]

Cleveland was the leader of the [[Bourbon Democrats]], the conservative wing of the party. They represented business interests, supported banking and railroad goals, promoted capitalism, opposed imperialism and U.S. verseas expansion, opposed the annexation of [[Hawaii]], fought for the [[gold standard]], and opposed [[Bimetallism]]. They strongly supported reform movements such as [[Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act|Civil Service Reform]] and opposed corruption of city bosses, leading the fight against the [[Tweed Ring]]. The leading Bourbons included [[Samuel J. Tilden]], [[David Bennett Hill]] and [[William C. Whitney]] of New York, [[Arthur Pue Gorman]] of Maryland, [[Thomas F. Bayard]] of Delaware, [[William L. Wilson]] of West Virginia, [[John Griffin Carlisle]] of Kentucky, [[William F. Vilas]] of Wisconsin, [[J. Sterling Morton]] of Nebraska, [[John M. Palmer]] of Illinois, [[Horace Boies]] of Iowa, [[L.Q.C. Lamar]] of Mississippi, and railroad builder [[James J. Hill]] of Minnesota. A prominent intellectual was [[Woodrow Wilson]]. The Bourbons were in power when the [[Panic of 1893]] hit; it was a deep depression and they took the blame. A fierce struggle inside the party ensued, with catastrophic losses for both the Bourbon and agrarian factions in 1894, leading to the showdown in 1896.
[[Image:Dead-dem1880.jpg|thumb|550px|In 1880 when General Hancock (right) became the presidential nominee of the Democrats, Republican cartoonists showed the Democratic party history as a horror chamber featuring atrocities in the Civil War era; the donkey" shows the party as a coalition of the rear end of the South joned to the rear end of the North]]

===Ethnocultural voting: pietistic Republicans versus liturgical Democrats===
Religious lines were sharply drawn.<ref>Kleppner (1979).</ref> Methodists, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Scandinavian Lutherans and other pietists and evangelicals in the North were tightly linked to the Republican Party. In sharp contrast, liturgical groups, especially the Catholics, Episcopalians, and German Lutherans, looked to the Democratic Party for protection from pietistic moralism, especially prohibition. Both parties cut across the class structure, with the Democrats more bottom-heavy.

Cultural issues, especially prohibition and foreign language schools became important because of the sharp religious divisions in the electorate. In the North, about 50% of the voters were pietistic or evangelical Protestants who believed the government should be used to reduce social sins, such as drinking. Liturgical churches (Roman Catholics, German Lutherans, Episcopalians) comprised over a quarter of the vote and wanted the government to stay out of the morality business. Prohibition debates and referenda heated up politics in most states over a period of decade, as national prohibition was finally passed in 1918 (and repealed in 1933), serving as a major issue in the North between the wet Democracy and the dry GOP.<ref>In the South the Democrats were mostly on the dry side. Kleppner (1979).</ref>

==The Bryan Movement==
[[Image:Mark Hanna 1896 election.jpg|thumb|290px|right|Democratic attack ad in 1896 against GOP National Chairman [[Mark Hanna]]; cartoon by Davenport depicts Hanna as a slave driver; from Hearst's ''New York Journal'']]
[[Grover Cleveland]] led the conservative, pro-business [[Bourbon Democrat]]s but as the [[Panic of 1893|depression of 1893]] deepened his enemies multiplied. The Panic of 1893 started in February 1893, a full month before Cleveland became president. Convinced that the [[Sherman Silver Purchase Act]], passed under the administration of [[Benjamin Harrison]], was largely responsible for the alarming drain on federal gold, President Cleveland called Congress into special session to urge its repeal. Congress consented, but only after bitter debate that divided the Democratic party into two hostile camps-the eastern "goldbugs" and the silver wing of the West and South that was to propel young [[William Jennings Bryan]] to the fore in 1896.<ref>William DeGregorio, ''The Complete Book of U.S. Presidents'', Gramercy 1997</ref> At the 1896 convention the silverite-agrarian faction repudiated the president, and nominated the crusading orator [[William Jennings Bryan]] on a platform of inflation through "free" silver. The idea was that minting huge numbers of silver dollars would flood the economy with cash and end the depression. Eastern Democrats, unable to accept the party's free-silver platform and unwilling to support McKinley for his tariff views, nominated their own candidate, John M. Palmer of Illinois and called themselves the National, or Gold, Democrats.<ref>William DeGregorio, ''The Complete Book of U.S. Presidents'', Gramercy 1997</ref> The [[Gold Democrats]] attracted politicians and intellectuals (including [[Woodrow Wilson]] and [[Frederick Jackson Turner]]) who refused to vote Republican.

Bryan, an overnight sensation because of his phenomenal "Cross of Gold" speech, crusaded against the gold standard. Crisscrossing the Midwest and East by special train, he gave over 500 speeches to audiences in the millions. In St. Louis he gave 36 speeches to workingmen's audiences all over the city, all in one day. Most Democratic newspapers were hostile (except [[William Randolph Hearst]]'s ''New York Journal'') but Bryan seized control of the media by making the news every day, as he hurled thunderbolts against Eastern monied interests. The rural folk in South and Midwest were ecstatic, showing an enthusiasm never before seen. Ethnic Democrats, especially Germans, however, were alarmed and frightened by Bryan. The middle classes, businessmen, newspaper editors, factory workers, railroad workers, and prosperous farmers generally rejected Bryan's crusade. Bryan was overwhelmed by [[William McKinley]] in the most exciting race in national history.<ref> Refuting Bryan's charges, historians have discovered there was little coercion of workers.</ref> McKinley promised a return to prosperity based on the gold standard, support for industry, railroads and banks, and pluralism that would enable every group to move ahead. Bryan did however, win the hearts and minds of a majority of Democrats. The election of 1896 was a political realignment. The victory of the Republican Party marked the start of the "Progressive Era," from 1896 to 1932, in which the GOP usually was dominant.

==Fourth Party System: Bryan, Wilson, Progressivism: 1896-1932 ==
The [[Fourth Party System]] began with the 1896 election, a realignment during which the GOP controlled the presidency for 28 of 36 years. The GOP dominated most of the Northeast and Midwest, and half the West. Bryan, with a base in the South and Plains states, was strong enough to get the nomination in 1900 (losing to McKinley) and 1908 (losing to Taft). [[Theodore Roosevelt]] dominated the first decade of the century—and to the annoyance of Democrats "stole" the trust issue by crusading against trusts.

[[Image:Steal~trust.JPG|thumb|250px|[[Theodore Roosevelt]] steals the anti-trust issue from the Democrats, 1904]]

Anti-Bryan conservatives controlled the convention in 1904, but they faced a [[Theodore Roosevelt]] landslide. Bryan dropped his free silver and anti-imperialism rhetoric and supported mainstream progressive issues, such as the income tax, anti-trust, and direct election of Senators. He backed [[Woodrow Wilson]] in 1912, was rewarded with the State Department, then resigned in protest against Wilson's non-pacifistic policies in 1916. Northern Democrats were progressive on most issues, but generally opposed prohibition, were lukewarm regarding woman's suffrage, and were reluctant to undercut the "boss system" in the big cities.

Taking advantage of a deep split in the GOP, the Democrats took control of the House in 1910, and elected the intellectual reformer [[Woodrow Wilson]] in 1912 and 1916. Wilson successfully led Congress to a series of Progressive laws, including a reduced tariff, stronger antitrust laws, the [[Federal Reserve System]], hours-and-pay benefits for railroad workers, and outlawing of child labor (which was reversed by the Supreme Court). Furthermore, constitutional amendments for prohibition and woman suffrage were passed in his second term. In effect, Wilson laid to rest the issues of tariffs, money and antitrust that had dominated politics for 40 years. Wilson led the U.S. to victory in the World War, and turned his attention to foreign affairs. He wrote parts of the [[Versailles Treaty]], especially the new [[League of Nations]]. But in 1919 Wilson's political skills faltered, and suddenly everything turned sour. The Senate rejected Versailles and the League, a nationwide wave of strikes and violence caused unrest, and Wilson's health collapsed. The GOP came roaring back in a landslide in 1920, as [[Warren G. Harding]] defeated a Democratic ticket memorable for having [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] as the vice presidential nominee.

[[Image:D-Edge-Congress.JPG|thumb|300px|Before 1932 Republicans usually controlled Congress; after 1932 the Democrats usually were in control]]

At the 1924 Democratic National Convention, the big fight was over a resolution denouncing by name the [[Ku Klux Klan]]; it was pushed by New York governor [[Al Smith]] and Alabama Senator [[Oscar W. Underwood]] in order to embarrass the front-runner, [[William McAdoo]] of California. After furious debate, the resolution failed by just a single vote. The KKK faded away soon after, but the deep split in the party over cultural issues, especially Prohibition, facilitated Republican landslides in 1920, 1924 and 1928. However [[Al Smith]] did build a strong Catholic base in the big cities in 1928, and [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]]'s election as Governor of New York that year brought a new leader to center stage.

== Fifth Party System: The New Deal ==
[[Image:509px-FDR in 1933.jpg|thumb|left|180px|President [[Franklin Delano Roosevelt]] (1933-1945)]]
The [[Wall Street Crash 1929|stock market crash of 1929]] and the ensuing [[Great Depression]] set the stage for a more progressive government and [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] won a [[landslide victory]] in the [[U.S. presidential election, 1932|election of 1932]], campaigning on a platform of "Relief, Recovery, and Reform." This came to be termed "[[New Deal|The New Deal]]" after a phrase in his acceptance speech. The Democrats also swept to large majorities in both houses of Congress, and among state Governors. Roosevelt altered the nature of the Party, away from laissez-faire capitalism, and towards an ideology of economic regulation and insurance against hardship. Conservative Democrats were outraged; led by [[Al Smith]] they formed the [[American Liberty League]] in 1934 and counterattacked. They failed and either retired from politics or joined the GOP. A few of them, such as [[Dean Acheson]] found their way back to the Democratic Party.

After making gains in Congress in 1934 Roosevelt moved left and embarked on an ambitious legislative program called "The Second New Deal." It was characterized by building up labor unions, nationalizing welfare by the [[WPA]] (which 2 million employed unemployed men), setting up [[Social Security]] and raising taxes on business profits.<ref> In general the New Deal, 1933-40, did not raise taxes, except for the Social Security tax that went into effect in 1937.</ref>

Roosevelt's [[New Deal]] programs focused on job creation through public works projects as well as Social Security. In the name of "reform" it imposed strong regulations on the banking and financial system, transportation, communications, stock markets and labor-management relations.

Roosevelt successfully built up the "[[New Deal Coalition]]", a powerful coalition of voters and interest groups that supported liberalism. Key components included big city machines and labor unions. Key voter groups included traditional Democrats, white Southerners, Catholics, Jews, and liberals, as well as many blacks. This united voter base allowed Democrats to be elected to Congress and the presidency for much of the next 30 years.

After a sweeping landslide reelection in 1936--losing only Maine and Vermont--Roosevelt stunned the nation, and his party, by calling for legislation to enlarge the Supreme Court by five new members. A firestorm of opposition erupted, led by his own vice president [[John Nance Garner]]. Roosevelt was defeated by an alliance of Republicans and conservative Democrats, who formed a [[Conservative coalition]] that managed to block nearly all liberal legislation. (Only a minimum wage law got through.) Angry with the conservative wing of his own party, Roosevelt tried to destroy it. In 1938, he actively campaigned against five incumbent conservative Democratic senators; all five senators won re-election.

Under FDR, the Democratic Party became identified closely with modern liberalism, which included the promotion of social welfare, unions and regulation of the economy. Civil rights were not on the party agenda at this time.

==Truman to Kennedy: 1945-1963==
Harry Truman took over unexpectedly in 1945, and the rifts inside the party that Roosevelt had papered over began to emerge. Former Vice President [[Henry A. Wallace]] denounced Truman as a war-monger for his anti-Soviet programs, the [[Truman Doctrine]], [[Marshall Plan]], and [[NATO]]. By cooperating with internationalist Republicans, Truman succeeded in defeating isolationists on the right and pro-Soviets on the left to establish a [[Cold War]] program that lasted until the fall of Communism in 1991. Wallace supporters and fellow travelers of the far left were pushed out of the party and the CIO in 1946-48 by young anti-Communists like [[Hubert Humphrey]], [[Walter Reuther]], and [[Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.]]. [[Hollywood]] emerged in the 1940s as an importance new base in the party, led by movie-star politicians such as [[Ronald Reagan]], who at this point in time strongly supported Roosevelt and Truman.<ref> Reagan became a conservative around 1960, saying the Democratic party had left him.</ref>

On the right the Republicans blasted Truman’s domestic policies. "Had Enough?" was the winning slogan as Republicans recaptured Congress in 1946. Many party leaders were ready to dump Truman, but they lacked an alternative. Truman counterattacked, pushing [[J. Strom Thurmond]] and his [[Dixiecrats]] out, and taking advantage of the splits inside the GOP. He was reelected in a stunning surprise. However all of Truman’s Fair Deal proposals, such as universal health care were defeated by the [[Conservative Coalition]] in Congress. His seizure of the steel industry was reversed by the Supreme Court.
In foreign policy, Europe was safe but troubles mounted in Asia. China fell to the Communists in 1949. Truman entered the [[Korean War]] without formal Congressional approval—the last time a president would ever do so. When the war turned to a stalemate in 1951 he fired General [[Douglas MacArthur]], a hero to conservatives. Republicans blasted Truman's failure to stop Communist gains in Asia. A series of petty scandals among friends and buddies of Truman further tarnished his image, allowing [[Dwight Eisenhower]] and the Republicans in 1952 to crusade against "Korea, Communism and Corruption." Truman dropped out of the presidential race early in 1952, leaving no obvious successor. The convention nominated [[Adlai Stevenson]] in 1952 and 1956, only to see him overwhelmed by two Eisenhower landslides.

[[Image:1952-32.jpg|thumb|480px|right|Stevenson and labor unions warn against a return of the Republican policies of Herbert Hoover in 1952 campaign poster]]

In Congress the powerful duo of House Speaker [[Sam Rayburn]] and Senate Majority leader [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] held the party together, often by compromising with Eisenhower. In 1958 the party made dramatic gains in the midterms and seemed to have a permanent lock on Congress. Indeed, Democrats had majorities in the House every election from 1930 to 1992 (except 1946 and 1952). Most southern Congressmen were conservative Democrats, however, and they usually worked with conservative Republicans. The result was a [[Conservative Coalition]] that blocked practically all liberal domestic legislation from 1937 to the 1970s, except for a brief spell 1964-65, when Johnson neutralized its power.

The nomination of [[John F. Kennedy]] in 1960 energized the Catholic population, which jammed motorcades and turned out in heavy numbers (over 80% voted for Kennedy), while also causing a backlash among white Protestants (over 70% of whom voted for Republican candidate [[Richard Nixon]]. Reaching beyond the traditional Irish, German, Italian and Polish Catholic ethnics, Viva Kennedy set out to mobilize the previously passive Latino vote, and it perhaps provided the margin of victory for Kennedy in Texas and New Mexico. Kennedy's victory reinvigorated the party. His youth, vigor and intelligence caught the popular imagination. In foreign policy he was strongly anti-Communist, and promptly launched an invasion of casto's Cuba; it failed badly. A few new programs like the Peace Corps harnessed idealism. In terms of legislation, Kennedy was stalemated by the [[Conservative Coalition]], and anyway his proposals were all cautious and incremental. In three years he was unable to pass any significant new legislation.

Kennedy's election did mark the coming of age of the Catholic component of the New Deal Coalition. After 1964 middle class Catholics started voting Republicans in the same proportion as their Protestant neighbors. Except for the Chicago of [[Richard J. Daley]], the last of the Democratic machines faded away. His involvement in Vietnam proved momentous, for his successor Lyndon Johnson decided to stay, and double the investment, and double the bet again and again until over 500,000 American soldiers were fighting in that small country.

==Civil Rights, Riots, War and collapse of the New Deal Coalition==
[[Image:LBJ-64.jpg|280px|left|thumb|President Lyndon Johnson ran for reelection in the shadow of Kennedy]]

The New Deal Coalition began to fracture as union and religious leaders demanded support for [[civil rights]], upsetting the party's traditional base of conservative Southern Democrats. After Harry Truman's platform showed support for civil rights and anti-segregation policies during the 1948 Democratic National Convention, many Southern Democratic delegates decided to split from the Party and formed the "[[Dixiecrats]]," led by [[South Carolina]] governor [[Strom Thurmond]] (who, as a Senator, would later join the Republican Party). Over the next few years, many conservative Democrats in the "[[Solid South]]" drifted away from the party. By 1940 most northern Blacks had shifted to the Democratic Party due to its New Deal relief programs and support for civil rights.

The party's dramatic reversal on civil rights issues culminated when Democratic President [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] signed into law the [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]]. The new laws ended segregation and also ended the main argument Democrats had used to block Republican gains in the South (that is, only the Democrats could protect segregation). The South became competitive in presidential politics in the 1970s and 1980s, giving strong support to Republican Ronald Reagan and rejecting the liberal northern candidates. The Democrats responded by nominating Southerners (Carter in 1976 and 1980, Clinton in 1992 and 1996, Gore in 2000). Few southern states were won by Democratic presidential candidates from the North (Humphrey in 1968, McGovern in 1972, Mondale in 1984, Dukakis in 1988, Kerry in 2004). At the state and local level the Republicans made slow, steady gains, especially among upscale middle class whites and migrants from the North. By the 1990s the GOP was competitive at the state and local level throughout the South. The Democrats made gains in the west, converting California to a Democratic stronghold and gaining in fast-growing Arizona and Nevada. The Northeast became more and more a Democratic enclave, especially after 2006 when numerous Republican moderates were defeated for reelection. the Midwest remained a battleground. The Democrats made strong gains in Illinois, but slipped a little in Minnesota.
[[Image:Demfight1968.jpg|thumb|290px|By 1968 Democrats were bitterly fighting over Vietnam and the failures of the Great Society]]

==1968 to 1999==
The Democratic party split five ways in 1968 and became the minority party in presidential elections for decades; after 1964 they won a majority of the presidential vote only in 2008.

[[Image:Jimmy Carter.jpg|thumb|right|180px|Jimmy Carter was elected in 1976 and defeated in 1980.]]
In 1972, the Democrats nominated Sen. [[George McGovern]] (SD) as the presidential candidate on a platform which advocated, among other things, U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam and a guaranteed minimum income for all Americans. McGovern's forces at the national convention ousted Mayor [[Richard J. Daley]] and the entire Chicago delegation, replacing them with insurgents led by [[Jesse Jackson]]. After it became know that McGovern's running mate, [[Thomas Eagleton]], had received electric shock therapy, McGovern said he supported Eagleton "1000%" but he was soon forced to drop him and find a new running mate. With his campaign stalled for several weeks McGovern finally selected [[Sargent Shriver]], a Kennedy-in-law who was close to Mayor Daley. On July 14, 1972, McGovern appointed his campaign manager, Jean Westwood as the first woman chair of the Democratic National Committee. McGovern was defeated in a landslide by incumbent [[Richard Nixon]], winning only Massachusetts and Washington, D.C. The [[Watergate affair]] of 1973-74 made corruption a central issue, especially after [[Gerald Ford]] pardoned Nixon in September 1974. The Democrats made major gains in the 1974 off-year elections.

In 1976, mistrust of the administration, complicated by a combination of economic recession and inflation, sometimes called ''[[stagflation]]'', led to Ford's narrow defeat in 1976 by [[Jimmy Carter]], a former governor of Georgia.

Carter represented the total outsider, who promised honesty in government. He had served as a naval officer, a farmer, a state senator, and a one-term governor. His only experience with federal politics was when he chaired the Democratic National Committee's congressional and gubernatorial elections in 1974. Some of Carter's major accomplishments consisted of the creation of a national energy policy and the consolidation of governmental agencies, resulting in two new cabinet departments, the [[United States Department of Energy]] and the [[United States Department of Education]]. Carter also successfully deregulated the trucking, airline, rail, finance, communications, and oil industries, bolstered the [[social security]] system, and appointed record numbers of women and minorities to significant government and judicial posts. He also enacted strong legislation on environmental protection, through the expansion of the [[National Park Service]] in [[Alaska]], creating 103 million new acres of land. In foreign affairs, Carter's accomplishments consisted of the [[Camp David Accords]], the [[Panama Canal Treaties]], the creation of full diplomatic relations with the [[People's Republic of China]], and the negotiation of the [[SALT II]] Treaty. In addition, he championed human rights throughout the world and used human rights as the center of his administration's foreign policy.

Even with all of these successes, Carter failed to implement a national health plan or to reform the tax system, as he had promised in his campaign. Inflation was also on the rise. Abroad, the Iranians held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days, and Carter's diplomatic and military rescue attempts failed. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan later that year weakened the perception Americans had of Carter. Even though he had already been defeated for re-election, Carter fortunately was able to negotiate the release of every American hostage. They were lifted out of Iran minutes after Reagan was inaugurated and Carter served as Reagan's emissary to greet them when they arrived in Germany. In 1980, Carter defeated liberal champion [[Edward Kennedy]] to gain renomination, but lost to conservative [[Ronald Reagan]] by a landslide. The Democrats lost 12 Senate seats, and for the first time since 1954, the Republicans controlled the Senate. The House, however, remained in Democratic hands.

===1980s: Battling Reaganism===
Instrumental in the election of Republican [[Ronald Reagan]] in 1980, were Democrats who supported many conservative policies. Among legislators, one of the most prominent of these consevative Democrats was Georgia congressman and second chairman of the [[John Birch Society]], [[Larry McDonald]], who was a passenger on [[Korean Airlines Flight 007]] shot down by the Soviets near [[Moneron Island]] on Sept. 1, 1983. The "Reagan Democrats" were Democrats before the Reagan years, and afterward, but they voted for [[Ronald Reagan]] in 1980 and 1984 (and for [[George H. W. Bush]] in 1988), producing their landslide victories. They were mostly white ethnics in the Northeast who were attracted to Reagan's social conservatism on issues such as abortion, and to his strong foreign policy. They did not continue to vote Republican in 1992 or 1996, so the term fell into disuse except as a reference to the 1980s. The term is not used to describe southern whites who became permanent Republicans in presidential elections. Stanley Greenberg, a Democratic pollster analyzed white ethnic voters, largely unionized auto workers, in suburban Macomb County, Michigan, just north of Detroit. The county voted 63 percent for Kennedy in 1960 and 66 percent for Reagan in 1984. He concluded that Reagan Democrats no longer saw Democrats as champions of their middle class aspirations, but instead saw it as being a party working primarily for the benefit of others, especially African Americans and the very poor. Bill Clinton targeted the Reagan Democrats with considerable success in 1992 and 1996.

[[Image:Liberal1984.jpg|thumb|350px]] The failure to hold the Reagan Democrats and the white South led to the final collapse of the [[New Deal coalition]]. Reagan carried 49 states against former Vice President and Minnesota Senator [[Walter Mondale]], a New Deal stalwart, in 1984. Massachusetts Governor [[Michael Dukakis]], running not as a New Dealer but as an efficiency expert in public administration, lost by a landslide in 1988 to Vice President [[George H. W. Bush]].

In response to these landslide defeats, the [[Democratic Leadership Council]] was created. It worked to move the Party rightwards to the ideological center in order to recover some of the fundraising that had been lost to the Republicans due to corporate donors supporting Reagan. With the Party retaining left-of-center supporters as well as supporters holding moderate or conservative views on some issues, the Democrats became generally a "big tent" or "catch all party" with widespread appeal to most opponents of the Republicans.

===The South Becomes Republican===
In the century after the end of [[Reconstruction]] in 1877, the white South identified with Democratic Party. The Democrats' lock on power was so strong, the region was called the [[Solid South]]. The Republicans only controlled parts of the Appalachian mountains, but they sometimes did compete for statewide office in the border states. Before 1964, the southern Democrats saw their party as the defender of the southern way of life, which included a respect for states' rights and an appreciation for traditional southern values. They repeatedly warned against the aggressive designs of Northern liberals and Republicans, as well as civil rights activists whom they denounced as "outside agitators."

However, between 1964 and 2004, the Democratic Party's lock on the South was broken. The long-term cause had to do with the South becoming more like the rest of the nation. It could not long stand apart in terms of racial segregation. Modernization had brought factories, national businesses, and larger, more cosmopolitan cities to the South, as well as millions of migrants from the North and more opportunities for higher education. Meanwhile, the cotton and tobacco economy of the traditional rural South faded away, as former farmers commuted to factory jobs.

Integration and the civil rights movement caused enormous controversy in the white South, with many attacking it as a violation of states' rights. When segregation was outlawed by court order and by the Civil Rights acts of 1964 and 1965, a die-hard element resisted integration, led by Democratic governors [[Orval Faubus]] of Arkansas, [[Lester Maddox]] of Georgia, and, especially [[George Wallace]] of Alabama. These populist governors appealed to a less-educated, blue-collar electorate that on economic grounds favored the Democratic Party, but opposed desegregation. After 1965 most Southerners accepted integration (with the exception of public schools). Believing themselves betrayed by the Democratic Party, traditional white southerners joined the new middle-class and the Northern transplants in moving toward the Republican Party. Meanwhile, newly enfranchised Black voters began supporting Democratic candidates at the 80-90-percent levels, producing Democratic leaders such as [[Julian Bond]] and [[John Lewis]] of Georgia, and [[Barbara Jordan]] of Texas. Just as Martin Luther King had promised, integration had brought about a new day in Southern politics, freeing both blacks and whites from old hatreds and fears.

Using issues of cultural conservatism, especially opposition to abortion and homosexuality and support for school prayer, Republicans attracted strong majorities among evangelical Christians. They were nationwide, but strongest in the South; before to the 1980s they were largely apolitical. Exit polls in 2004 showed that Bush led Kerry by 70-30% among Southern whites, who comprised 71% of the voters. Kerry had a 90-9 lead among the 18% of Southern voters who were black. One third of the Southern voters said they were white evangelicals; they voted for Bush by 80-20.<ref> See the exit polls at [http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.3.html |date=[[2004-11-02]]|accessdate=2006-11-18]</ref>

===1990s===

In the 1990s the Democratic Party revived itself, in part by moving to the right on economic and social policy. President [[Bill Clinton]], who defeated the incumbent [[George H. W. Bush]] in 1992, implemented a balanced federal budget and [[welfare reform]] (cutting benefits and requiring many recipients to take jobs), traditionally conservative causes. Labor unions, which had been steadily losing membership since the 1960s, found they had also lost political clout inside the Democratic Party: Clinton enacted the [[NAFTA]] free trade agreement with Canada and Mexico over the strong objection of these labor unions, much to the disappointment of those on the left of the party. The [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican Party]] took control of both the House of Representatives and the United States Senate after the 1994 election. Clinton was impeached in 1998 and subsequently acquitted in 1999.

When the [[DLC]] attempted to move the Democratic agenda in favor of more centrist positions, prominent Democrats from both the centrist and conservative factions assumed leadership of the party and its direction. Some liberals and progressives felt alienated by the Democratic Party, which they felt had become unconcerned with the interests of the common people and left-wing issues in general. Some Democrats challenged the validity of such critiques, citing the Democratic role in pushing for progressive reforms.

==21st century==
===Election of 2000===
During the presidential election of 2000, the Democrats chose Vice President [[Al Gore]] to be the party's candidate for the presidency. Gore and [[George W. Bush]], the Republican candidate and son of former President George H.W. Bush, disagreed on a number of issues, including abortion, gun control, environmentalism, gay rights, tax cuts, foreign policy, public education, global warming, judicial appointments, and affirmative action. Nevertheless, Gore's affiliation with Clinton and the DLC caused critics—Green Party presidential candidate [[Ralph Nader]] in particular—to assert that Bush and Gore were too similar, especially on free trade, reductions in social welfare, and the death penalty. "We want to punish the Democrats, we want to hurt them, wound them," Nader's closest advisor said.<ref>Harry G. Levinem "Ralph Nader, Suicide Bomber." ''The Village Voice'' May 3, 2004 at [http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0418,levine,53179,1.html] </ref>

Gore won a popular plurality of over 500,000 votes over Bush, but lost in the electoral vote by four votes. In a close election anything can be decisive, but many angry Democrats blamed Nader's third-party spoiler role for Gore's defeat. Controversy plagued the election, and Gore largely dropped from politics for years; by 2005 however he was making speeches critical of Bush's foreign and environmental policies.

Despite Gore's close defeat, the Democrats gained five seats in the Senate (including the election of [[Hillary Clinton]] in New York), to turn a 55-45 Republican edge into a 50-50 split (with a Republican Vice President breaking a tie). However, when Republican Senator [[Jim Jeffords]] of Vermont decided in 2001 to become an independent and vote with the Democratic Caucus, the majority status shifted along with the seat, including control of the floor (by the Majority Leader) and control of all committee chairmanships. However, the Republicans regained their Senate majority with gains in 2002 and 2004, leaving the Democrats with only 44 seats, the fewest since the 1920s.

===2001-2003===
In the aftermath of the [[9-11 Attacks]], the nation's focus was changed to issues of national security. All but one Democrat<ref> Representative [[Barbara Lee]] of Texas</ref> joined the Republicans to authorize President Bush to invade invasion of Afghanistan and overthrow the Taliban. House leader [[Richard Gephardt]] and Senate leader [[Thomas Daschle]] pushed Democrats to vote for the [[USA PATRIOT Act]] and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The Democrats were split over entering Iraq in 2003 and increasingly expressed concerns about both the justification and progress of the [[War on Terrorism]], as well as the domestic effects, including supposed threats to civil rights and civil liberties from the PATRIOT Act. Senator [[Russ Feingold]] was the only Senator to vote against the act; it received more resistance when it came up for renewal, but was renewed in 2006.

In the wake of the financial fraud scandal of the [[Enron Corporation]] and other corporations, Congressional Democrats pushed for a legal overhaul of business accounting with the intention of preventing further accounting fraud. This led to the bipartisan [[Sarbanes-Oxley Act]] in 2002. Economic issues did not work well in 2002, as the Democrats lost a few seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. They lost three seats in the Senate. While Democrats gained governorships in New Mexico (where [[Bill Richardson]] was elected), Arizona ([[Janet Napolitano]]) and Wyoming ([[Dave Freudenthal]]), other Democrats lost governorships in South Carolina ([[Jim Hodges]]), Alabama ([[Don Siegelman]]) and, for the first time in more than a century, Georgia ([[Roy Barnes]]). The election led to another round of soul searching about the party's narrowing base. The party's miseries mounted in 2003, when a voter recall unseated their unpopular governor of California, [[Gray Davis]], and replaced him which a charismatic liberal Republican [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]]. By the end of 2003 the four largest states had Republican governors: California, Texas, New York and Florida.

===Election of 2004===
The 2004 campaign began in late 2002, when Gore said he would not run again. [[Howard Dean]], former Governor of Vermont, an opponent of the war and a critic of the Democratic establishment, was the front-runner leading into the Democratic primaries. Dean had immense grassroots support, especially from the left wing of the party. Massachusetts Senator [[John Kerry]], a more centrist figure with heavy support from the [[Democratic Leadership Council]], was nominated because he was seen as more "electable" than Dean. Democrats moved to populist anti-business positions that denounced free trade and the [[NAFTA]] agreement. The party rhetoric attacked the Bush administration rather than propose alternative programs.

In the end, Kerry lost both the popular vote (by 3 million out of over 120 million votes cast) and the [[Electoral College]]. Republicans also gained four seats in the Senate and three seats in the House of Representatives, and for the first time since 1952, the Democratic leader of the Senate lost re-election. In the end, there were 3,660 Democratic state legislators across the nation to the Republicans' 3,557. Democrats gained governorships in Louisiana, New Hampshire and Montana. However, they lost the governorship of Missouri and a legislative majority in Georgia, which had long been a Democratic stronghold.

There were many reasons for the defeat. After the election most analysts concluded that Kerry was a poor campaigner.<ref>Evan Thomas and Staff of Newsweek,''Election 2004: How Bush Won and What You Can Expect in the Future''(2005)</ref> A group of Vietnam veterans opposed to Kerry called the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" undercut Kerry's use of his military past as a campaign strategy. Kerry was unable to reconcile his initial support of the [[Iraq War]] with his opposition to the war in 2004, or manage the deep split in the Democratic Party between those who favored and opposed the war. Republicans ran thousands of television commercials to argue that Kerry had flip-flopped on Iraq. When Kerry's home state of Massachusetts legalized same-sex marriage, the issue split liberal and conservative Democrats and independents (Kerry publicly stated throughout his campaign that he opposed same sex marriage, but favored civil unions). Republicans exploited the same-sex marriage issue by promoting ballot initiatives in 11 states that brought conservatives to the polls in large numbers; all 11 initiatives passed. Some Democrats argued that flaws in vote-counting systems may also have played a role in Kerry's defeat in Ohio. Other factors include a healthy job market, a rising stock market, strong home sales, and low unemployment.

After the 2004 election, prominent Democrats began to rethink the party's direction, and a variety of strategies for moving forward were voiced. Some Democrats proposed moving towards the right; others demanded that the party move more to the left and become a stronger opposition party. . Rethinking the party's position on gun control became a matter of discussion, brought up by [[Howard Dean]], [[Bill Richardson]], [[Brian Schweitzer]] and other Democrats who had won governorships in states where Second Amendment rights were important to many voters.

===2005 - 2007===
These debates were reflected in the 2005 campaign for Chairman of the [[Democratic National Committee]], which [[Howard Dean]] won. He sought to move the Democratic strategy away from the establishment, and bolster support for the party's state organizations, even in Red states.

When the 109th Congress convened in 2005, [[Harry Reid]], the new Senate Minority Leader, tried to convince the Democratic Senators to vote more as a bloc on important issues; he forced the Republicans to abandon their push for privatization of Social Security. In 2005, the Democrats retained their governorships in Virginia and New Jersey, electing [[Tim Kaine]] and [[Jon Corzine]], respectively. However, the party lost the mayoral race in New York City, a Democratic stronghold, for the fourth straight time.

In 2006, with scandals involving Republican lobbyist [[Jack Abramoff]], as well as GOP House leader [[Tom DeLay]], Ohio GOP governor [[Bob Taft]] and others, the Democrats used the slogan "Culture of corruption." Negative public opinion on the war in Iraq, along with widespread dissatisfaction among conservatives over government spending, dragged President Bush's job approval ratings down to the lowest levels of his presidency. To win control the Democrats had to add 15 seats in the House (they added 30), and 6 in the Senate (they added 6).

The Democratic Party's electoral success has been attributed to running relatively conservative Democrats in close seats, such as the Senate races in Virginia, Pennsylvania and Montana. <ref> Dewan Shaila and Anne E. Kornblut, "In Key House Races, Democrats Run to the Right," ''New York Times,'' 2006-10-30; but compare Rick Perlstein, "Who deserves credit for the Democratic comeback?" ''The New Republic'' 2006-11-08]] at [https://ssl.tnr.com/p/docsub.mhtml?i=w061106&s=perlstein110806] </ref> Exit polling suggested that corruption was a key issue for many voters.<ref>CNN, "Corruption named as key issue by voters in exit polls," 2006-11-08 at [http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/07/election.exitpolls/] </ref>

In 2006 Democrats gained a majority of governorships and made gains in many state legislatures. No Democratic incumbent was defeated in any major race.
===2007-2010===
[[File:Obama_approval_index_december_22_2009.jpg‎|thumb|250px]]
House Democrats chose Rep. [[Nancy Pelosi]] of California for Speaker, the first woman ever, but rejected her choice for Majority Leader. Senate Democrats promoted Harry Reid to Majority Leader. Neither have been very effective.

The presidential campaign of 2008 featured a remarkable duel between Obama--the first major black candidate, and [[Hillary Clinton]], the first major woman contender. Obama won with his charismatic oratory and his highly efficient fund-raising and strong organization in the caucus states, while Clinton went downscale to pick up big majorities among poor whites and Hispanics. The contest between Obama and GOP nominee [[John McCain]] was very close until September, when the collapse of the financial system soured the voters on the GOP.

The [[Obama Administration]] got off to a fast start in 2009, especially in vigorous efforts to combat the [[Recession of 2008]] with heavy new stimulus spending, massive loans to banks, increased regulation, and deep intervention in the automobile industry. All those policies were begun by Bush, and had failed to reverse the decline of the economy in late 2008. Whether they will now succeed remains an open question, with the GOP now voting solidly against them and some conservatives like [[Rush Limbaugh]] hoping that the Democrats will fail badly and that the people will again turn to the Republican party. The Democratic Party is feeling the sting from the opposition and many Democrats are beginning to question their own leadership. Liberals are disenchanted with Obama's hawkish position on the [[Afghanistan War]]. The health care reform that consumed most of 2009 remains unsettled, as public opinion has turned against it. Environmentalists now seem resigned to the failure of a [[cap and trade]] program to reduce CO2 emissions. Most of all the recession drags on. The stimulus bill was passed quickly in Feb. 2009 over almost unanimous GOP opposition, but despite promises of "shovel ready" projects, most of the money has not been spent a year later and the economy remains in the doldrums.

The elections in Nov. 2009 in New Jersey and Virginia went badly for the Democrats, as the GOP gained both governorships and many local races, not to mention the Democrats' fifth straight loss for the mayoralty of New York City.

see [[2010 Midterm Elections]]

==Symbols==
The most common symbol for the party is the donkey, although the party itself never officially adopted this symbol.<ref>[http://www.democrats.org/a/2005/06/history_of_the.php History of the Democratic Donkey]. </ref> Some historians suggest the jackass was born 1828 when Jackson was sometimes called a jackass by his opponents as a play on his name. A political cartoon depicting Jackson riding and directing a donkey (representing the Democratic Party) was published in 1837. A political cartoon by [[Thomas Nast]] in an 1870 revived the donkey as a symbol for the Democratic Party. Cartoonists ever since have followed Nast and used the donkey to represent the Democrats, and the elephant to represent the Republicans.

In the early 20th century, the traditional symbol of the Democratic Party in many states was the rooster, as opposed to the Republican eagle.

There is no official color, but since election night 2000 blue has become the identification color of the Democratic Party for maps, while the red has become the color of the Republicans. Increasingly blue is used by Democrats for promotions (e.g BuyBlue, BlueFund) and by the party itself, which in 2006 unveiled the "Red to Blue Program" to support Democratic candidates running against Republican incumbents in the 2006 midterm election.

[[Jefferson-Jackson Day]] annual fundraising celebrations are held by local chapters of the Democratic Party.

The song "[[Happy Days Are Here Again]]" is the unofficial song of the Democratic Party. It was used prominently when Roosevelt was nominated for president at the 1932 Democratic National Convention and remains a sentimental favorite for Democrats today. During the [[Bill Clinton|Clinton]] era, the [[Fleetwood Mac]] song "Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow" became a popular song at Democratic events, reflecting the growing prominence of Baby Boomers in the party.

==Democratic Presidents==
* [[Andrew Jackson]] (1829-1837)
* [[Martin Van Buren]] (1837-1841)
* [[James K. Polk]] (1845-1849)
* [[Franklin Pierce]] (1853-1857)
* [[James Buchanan]] (1857-1861)
* [[Grover Cleveland]] (1885-1889) (1893-1897)
* [[Woodrow Wilson]] (1913-1921)
* [[Franklin Roosevelt]] (1933-1945)
* [[Harry S Truman]] (1945-1953)
* [[John F. Kennedy]] (1961-1963)
* [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] (1963-1969)
* [[Jimmy Carter]] (1977-1981)
* [[Bill Clinton]] (1993-2001)
* [[Barack Obama]] (2009 - Present)

==See also==
*[[Previous Breaking News/Democrats|Articles about '''Democrats''' from previous "Breaking News"]]
*[[Gestapo care]]

==Bibliography==
===Current===
*Barone, Michael, and Grant Ujifusa, ''The Almanac of American Politics 2008: The Senators, the Representatives and the Governors: Their Records and Election Results, Their States and Districts'' (2007) covers all the live politicians with amazing detail. New edition every two years since 1975.
* Brownstein, Ronald. ''The Second Civil War: How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America''(2007)
* Crane, Michael. ''The Political Junkie Handbook: The Definitive Reference Books on Politics'' (2004) covers all the major issues explaining the parties' positions
*Sabato, Larry J. ''Divided States of America: The Slash and Burn Politics of the 2004 Presidential Election'' (2005).
*Sabato, Larry J. ed. ''The Sixth Year Itch: The Rise and Fall of the George W. Bush Presidency'' (1907), in-depth essays by scholars on key states in 2006
* Sabato, Larry J., and Howard R. Ernst eds. ''Political Parties and Elections'' (2007), 540pp; an encyclopedia with 450 entries by scholars; focus is 1945 to present
* Sabato, Larry J. and Bruce Larson. ''The Party's Just Begun: Shaping Political Parties for America's Future'' (2001) textbook.
* Shafer, Byron E. and Anthony J. Badger, eds. ''Contesting Democracy: Substance and Structure in American Political History, 1775-2000'' (2001), long essays by specialists on each time period
* Shafer, Byron and Richard Johnston. ''The End of Southern Exceptionalism'' (2006), uses statistical election data & polls to argue GOP growth was primarily a response to economic change
===Historical===
* ''American National Biography'' (20 volumes, 1999) covers all politicians no longer alive; online and paper copies at many academic libraries.
* Jensen, Richard. ''Grass Roots Politics: Parties, Issues, and Voters, 1854-1983'' (1983) [http://www.questia.com/library/book/grass-roots-politics-parties-issues-and-voters-1854-1983-by-christopher-c-gibbs-richard-j-jensen-steven-l-piott.jsp online edition]; survey by conservative scholar, with primary sources
* Kennedy, David M. ''Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945'' (2001), synthesis by leading scholar; Pulitzer prize [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=52284041 online edition]
* Kleppner, Paul et al. ''The Evolution of American Electoral Systems'' (1983), essays by scholars (some of them conservatives), 1790s to 1980s.
* Kleppner, Paul. ''The Third Electoral System 1853-1892: Parties, Voters, and Political Cultures'' (1979), analysis of voting behavior, with emphasis on region, ethnicity, religion and class. [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=24451028 online edition]
* Ling, Peter J. ''The Democratic Party: A Photographic History'' (2003).
* Patterson, James T. ''Grand Expectations: The United States, 1945-1974'' (1997) synthesis by leading scholar. [http://www.amazon.com/Grand-Expectations-United-1945-1974-History/dp/0195117972/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1211911625&sr=1-2 excerpt and text search]
* Patterson, James T. ''Restless Giant: The United States from Watergate to Bush vs. Gore'' (2005) synthesis by leading scholar. [http://www.amazon.com/Restless-Giant-United-Watergate-History/dp/0195305221/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1211911625&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]
* Ritchie, Donald A. ''Electing FDR: The New Deal Campaign of 1932'' (2007) [http://www.amazon.com/Electing-FDR-Campaign-Presidential-Elections/dp/0700615504/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1195784762&sr=8-2 excerpt and text search]
* Rutland, Robert Allen. ''The Democrats: From Jefferson to Clinton'' (1995).
* Shafer, Byron E. and Anthony J. Badger, eds. ''Contesting Democracy: Substance and Structure in American Political History, 1775-2000'' (2001), most recent collection of new essays by specialists on each time period:
**includes: "State Development in the Early Republic: 1775–1840" by Ronald P. Formisano; "The Nationalization and Racialization of American Politics: 1790–1840" by David Waldstreicher; "'To One or Another of These Parties Every Man Belongs;": 1820–1865 by Joel H. Silbey; "Change and Continuity in the Party Period: 1835–1885" by Michael F. Holt; "The Transformation of American Politics: 1865–1910" by Peter H. Argersinger; "Democracy, Republicanism, and Efficiency: 1885–1930" by Richard Jensen; "The Limits of Federal Power and Social Policy: 1910–1955" by Anthony J. Badger; "The Rise of Rights and Rights Consciousness: 1930–1980" by James T. Patterson, Brown University; and "Economic Growth, Issue Evolution, and Divided Government: 1955–2000" by Byron E. Shafer
* Schlisinger, Galbraith. ''Of the People: The 200 Year History of the Democratic Party'' (1992)
* Sundquist, James L. ''Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and Realignment of Political Parties in the United States'', (1983) [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=29223022 online edition
* Wilentz, Sean. ''The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln'' (2005), detailed synthesis by a leading liberal scholar. [http://www.amazon.com/Rise-American-Democracy-Jefferson-Lincoln/dp/0393058204/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1195784940&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search]
* Witcover, Jules. ''Party of the People: A History of the Democrats'' (2003)
* Schlesinger, Arthur Meier, Jr. ed. ''History of American Presidential Elections, 1789-2000'' (various multivolume editions, latest is 2001). For each election includes a short history by a leading scholar and a selection of primary documents.

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://www.democrats.org/ Democratic Party Official Site]
*[http://www.demconvention.com/assets/downloads/2008-Democratic-Platform-final.pdf 2008 Democratic Platform (pdf download)]

[[Category:United States Political Organizations]]
[[Category:United States Political Parties]]
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
[[Category:Progressive Era]]
[[Category:Gilded Age]]
[[Category:New Deal]]
[[Category:Reagan Era]]
[[Category:1960s]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Liberals]]
[[category:Jacksonian Democracy]]

Abrahamic religion

2010-07-13T04:01:36Z

ChrisGT90: Major additions

The '''Abrahamic religions''' are those that can trace their history back to [[Abraham]]. Many believe that the three Abrahamic religions worship the same [[God]].<ref>[http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/029.qmt.html#029.046 Surah 29]</ref> Judaism, the first Abrahamic religion, is considered to be an [[ethnic religion]] because it was the indigenous religion of the [[Hebrew people]], but Christianity and Islam are considered to be [[universalizing religion]]s.

The significance of Abraham in [[Judaism]] and [[Christianity]] begins in [[Genesis]] 12:2, when [[God]] says to Abraham "I will make of you a great nation." According to Jews and Christians, this promise was fulfilled as Abraham's son [[Isaac]] was the father of [[Jacob]], who founded [[Israel]].

According to [[Islam]], the significance of Abraham's lineage was trough his eldest son, [[Ishmael]]. Muslims believe that [[Mohammed]] is a descendant of Abraham through this line. Muslims also believe that Abraham was the first Muslim.

== List of Abrahamic religions ==

* [[Judaism]]
* [[Christianity]]
* [[Islam]]

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Abrahamic Religions]]
[[Category:Religion]]
[[Category:Old Testament]]

Obamaisms

2010-07-13T03:41:06Z

ChrisGT90: Grannar

'''''Obama-isms''' are [[gaffe]]s, historical errors, falsehoods, and badly-worded statements spoken by [[Barack Obama]]. See also [[Bushism]]s and [[Obamaspeak]]. It should, however, be noted that all politicans do make at least some speaking mistakes. With Obama in the public eye, his mistakes are more noticeable, and such an article is understandable.''

== Examples: ==

*“From the bomb that fell on Pearl Harbor….”

*“John McCain has not talked about [[my Muslim faith]].”

*“There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama, because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born.” (Obama was born in 1961 and the Selma march was in 1965)

*“I've now been in [[57 states]], I think, one left to go.”

*“….when you spread the wealth around, I think it’s good for everybody.”

*“Thank you Sioux City” Obama said in Sioux Falls.

*“My father served in World War II, and when he came home, he got the services that he needed.” (At the end of WWII, Obama’s father was 10 years old.)

*Obama suggested that we need Arabic translators in Afghanistan, where they don’t speak Arabic.

*“Well, Tim, first of all, it's not me who's criticized these proposals,” Obama said to Matt Lauer.

*“Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula?...I mean, they're charging a lot of money for this stuff,” Obama said to a crowd in Iowa, where there are no Whole Foods.

*“Well let me be absolutely clear. Israel is a strong friend of Israel's.”

*“Israel is an ally of ours. It is the most important ally we have in the region, and there is no doubt that we would act forcefully and appropriately on any attack against Iran, nuclear or otherwise.”

*“I'm running to be commander of chief on a record of standing up for our wounded warriors.”

*"If I talked to Iran, I'm going to tell them, 'You should develop a nuclear weapon...'"

*"It was also interesting to see that political interaction in Europe is not that different from the United States Senate. There's a lot of -- I don't know what the term is in Austrian..." (There is no Austrian language). [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/News-Conference-By-President-Obama-4-04-2009/]

==See Also==
*[[Bushism|Bushisms]]

[[Category:Barack Hussein Obama]]
[[Category:United States Politics]]
[[Category: Liberals]]
{{Liberalism}}

Obamaisms

2010-07-13T03:39:48Z

ChrisGT90: Removed two statements that aren't Obama-isms

'''''Obama-isms''' are [[gaffe]]s, historical errors, falsehoods, and badly-worded statements spoken by [[Barack Obama]]. See also [[Bushism]]s and [[Obamaspeak]]. It should, however, be noted that all politicans do make at least some speaking mistakes. With Obama in the public eye, his mistakes are more noticeable, and such an article is understandable.''

== Examples: ==

*“From the bomb that fell on Pearl Harbor….”

*“John McCain has not talked about [[my Muslim faith]].”

*“There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama, because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born.” (Obama was born in 1961 and the Selma march was in 1965)

*“I've now been in [[57 states]], I think, one left to go.”

*“….when you spread the wealth around, I think it’s good for everybody.”

*“Thank you Sioux City” Obama said in Sioux Falls.

*“My father served in World War II, and when he came home, he got the services that he needed.” (At the end of WWII, Obama’s father was 10 years old.)

*Obama suggested that we need Arabic translators in Afghanistan, where they don’t speak Arabic.

*“Well, Tim, first of all, it's not me who's criticized these proposals,” Obama said to Matt Lauer.

*“Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula?...I mean, they're charging a lot of money for this stuff,” Obama said to a crowd in Iowa, where there are no Whole Foods.

*“Well let me be absolutely clear. Israel is a strong friend of Israel's.”

*“Israel is an ally of ours. It is the most important ally we have in the region, and there is no doubt that we would act forcefully and appropriately on any attack against Iran nuclear or otherwise.”

*“I'm running to be commander of chief on a record of standing up for our wounded warriors.”

* "If I talked to Iran, I'm going to tell them, 'You should develop a nuclear weapon...."

* "It was also interesting to see that political interaction in Europe is not that different from the United States Senate. There's a lot of -- I don't know what the term is in Austrian..." (There is no Austrian language). [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/News-Conference-By-President-Obama-4-04-2009/]

==See Also==
*[[Bushism|Bushisms]]

[[Category:Barack Hussein Obama]]
[[Category:United States Politics]]
[[Category: Liberals]]
{{Liberalism}}

Obamaisms

2010-07-13T03:33:01Z

ChrisGT90: Intro paragraph

'''''Obama-isms''' are [[gaffe]]s, historical errors, falsehoods, and badly-worded statements spoken by [[Barack Obama]]. See also [[Bushism]]s and [[Obamaspeak]]. It should, however, be noted that all politicans do make at least some speaking mistakes. With Obama in the public eye, his mistakes are more noticeable, and such an article is understandable.''

== Examples: ==

*“From the bomb that fell on Pearl Harbor….”

*“John McCain has not talked about [[my Muslim faith]].”

*“There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama, because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born.” (Obama was born in 1961 and the Selma march was in 1965)

*“I've now been in [[57 states]], I think, one left to go.”

*“….when you spread the wealth around, I think it’s good for everybody.”

*“If they [his daughters] make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

*“Thank you Sioux City” Obama said in Sioux Falls.

*“My father served in World War II, and when he came home, he got the services that he needed.” (At the end of WWII, Obama’s father was 10 years old.)

*Obama suggested that we need Arabic translators in Afghanistan, where they don’t speak Arabic.

*“Well, Tim, first of all, it's not me who's criticized these proposals,” Obama said to Matt Lauer.

*“Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula?...I mean, they're charging a lot of money for this stuff,” Obama said to a crowd in Iowa, where there are no Whole Foods.

*“Well let me be absolutely clear. Israel is a strong friend of Israel's.”

*“Israel is an ally of ours. It is the most important ally we have in the region, and there is no doubt that we would act forcefully and appropriately on any attack against Iran nuclear or otherwise.”

*“I'm running to be commander of chief on a record of standing up for our wounded warriors.”

* “Our troops fight and die in 120-degree heat to give Iraq's leaders the space to agree, but they aren't filling that space.”

* "If I talked to Iran, I'm going to tell them, 'You should develop a nuclear weapon...."

* "It was also interesting to see that political interaction in Europe is not that different from the United States Senate. There's a lot of -- I don't know what the term is in Austrian..." (There is no Austrian language). [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/News-Conference-By-President-Obama-4-04-2009/]

==See Also==
*[[Bushism|Bushisms]]

[[Category:Barack Hussein Obama]]
[[Category:United States Politics]]
[[Category: Liberals]]
{{Liberalism}}

BP

2010-06-29T20:58:46Z

ChrisGT90: /* Mergers and Exansion (1988-Present) */

'''BP''' is a British energy company. Originally founded it 1909,<ref>This source was used throughout the History section: BP. (2010). ''Our History''. Retrieved June 29, 2010, from http://www.bp.com/extendedsectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=10&contentId=7036819</ref> it is now one of the world's largest energy companies<ref>BP. (2010). ''BP at a glance''. Retrieved June 29, 2010, from http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=3&contentId=2006926</ref> and [[United States|America's]] largest [[oil]] and gas producer.<ref>BP. (2010). ''Oil: Going below and beyond for energy security''. Retrieved June 29, 2010, from http://www.bp.com/iframe.do?categoryId=9030821&contentId=7056949</ref>

BP leased and operated the Deepwater Horizon offshore drilling rig that exploded on April 20 of 2010, leading to the [[Gulf of Mexico oil spill]].

== History ==

===Beginnings (1901-1934)===
In 1901, Englishman William D'Arcy got exclusive rights to search for oil in southwest Persia. D'Arcy struck oil in 1908, and started the Anglo-Persian Oil Company in 1909. [[Winston Churchill]] argued to [[Parliament]] in 1914 that Britain needed to secure a dedicated oil supply, and the [[United Kingdom]] government became a major shareholder in the Anglo-Persian oil company. In 1917 the Anglo-Persian oil company purchased British Petroleum, which at the time had oil, but no way to get it to consumers. By 1925 British Petroleum had 6,000 roadside pumps in the UK.

===Trouble in Iran (1935-1987)===
When Persia became [[Iran]] in 1935, Anglo-Persian became Anglo-Iranian. [[Politics|Political]] changes in Iran forced Anglo-Iranian's refinery to temporarily shut down in 1951 as Iranian oil was [[nationalization|nationalized]]. The refinery was opened again in 1954, but as Anglo-Iranian was no longer the only oil company in Iran, they changed their name to British Petroleum. Iran’s oil industry was completely nationalized in 1979 following the [[Islam|Islamic]] Revolution, and British Petroleum was forced to end its operations in the country.

===The Stock Goes Public (1987)===
The British government sold the last of its shares in British Petroleum in October 1987, allowing the company would finally be completely [[privatization|privatized]] for the first time in 73 years. The privatization of the company was expected to boost share values, but the [[Black Monday]] stock market crash occurred just before the sale, drastically reducing share values. The [[Kuwait|Kuwaiti]] government bought 22% of British Petroleum’s total shares while the price was low. Eventually British Petroleum bought back nearly 400 million of the Kuwaiti shares and cancelled them.

===Mergers and Exansion (1988-Present)===
British Petroleum bought Britoil in 1988. Full ownership of Sohio was acquired in 1989. British Petroleum merged with Amoco in 1998, and the organization was officially renamed BP Amoco. ARCO joined the BP Amoco group in 2000. The group also acquired Burmah-Castrol in 2000 and rebranded itself as BP. Castrol continues to operate under its brand name while Burmah’s operations were incorporated into BP.

==References==
{{reflist}}