Leftism has invaded Liberalism

[The General]

Liberalism and Leftism have become synonymous, much to the detriment of our society.  But these terms used to mean very different things.  It confuses a great many of those that continue to vote Democrat, thinking that they are voting for the values of JFK, but they are unknowingly voting for the values of Marx.

The political left is the home of pure communism, socialism, theocracy, fascism, and other rights-violating systems of government.  In contrast, the classical liberal, in the example of someone like JFK, believed in capitalism, individual rights, the rule of law, limited government, private property, and laissez faire economics.

Over the last 50 years or so, the liberals of America's political power structure have taken a huge leftward shift.  The principles of the classical liberal were abandoned and replaced with leftist ideas like group rights, increased government, and redistribution of wealth.  These were ideas that no classical liberal would have ever embraced.

I personally believe that many well-meaning, self-proclaimed liberals are now voting for leftist ideals without their full understanding.  Obama is not a liberal.  He is a man of the left.  This is a new Democrat party.  Mitt Romney is the liberal in this race. 

[PB the Deplorable]

Liberalism and Leftism have become synonymous, much to the detriment of our society.  But these terms used to mean very different things.  It confuses a great many of those that continue to vote Democrat, thinking that they are voting for the values of JFK, but they are unknowingly voting for the values of Marx.

The political left is the home of pure communism, socialism, theocracy, fascism, and other rights-violating systems of government.  In contrast, the classical liberal, in the example of someone like JFK, believed in capitalism, individual rights, the rule of law, limited government, private property, and laissez faire economics.

Over the last 50 years or so, the liberals of America's political power structure have taken a huge leftward shift.  The principles of the classical liberal were abandoned and replaced with leftist ideas like group rights, increased government, and redistribution of wealth.  These were ideas that no classical liberal would have ever embraced.

I personally believe that many well-meaning, self-proclaimed liberals are now voting for leftist ideals without their full understanding.  Obama is not a liberal.  He is a man of the left.  This is a new Democrat party.  Mitt Romney is the liberal in this race.

I would agree with this.

The definitions have moved over the years.  Thomas Jefferson was the classic Liberal.  He would be sick and disgusted at what passes for 'Liberal' today.

I personally think of modern day Liberals as well meaning folks that truly believe the Government is the best way to effectively to solve problems and that if we just could get the right people into office, society could be made to run much smoother through higher taxes, more programs, and goodwill.  They think that by reaching out to criminals and people that hate us (the Moslems are the current flavor of the day), we can convince them of our good intentions and we can then all live in harmony.  They will try to appease anyone threatening, demanding, or just claiming to be a 'victim', claim to feel 'uncomfortable' or 'offended'.  None of this tends to work, it mostly wastes money and emboldens the agressive.  So, well meaning but completely deluded people.  These people consider others to be 'bigots', 'greedy', 'unenlightened', and 'stupid'.

I believe the Leftists to be completely different.  Anti-American, anti-Capitalism, anti-Fredom and Liberty, full of hate and bile, these people do not mean well at all.  They are the ones burning flags, screaming obscenities, they are the protesters that end up burning, rioting, looting.  They use our Constitution against us while trashing it.  They lie and are way over the top in their accusations and commentary.  Like termites they will do everything in their power to erode our society, our economy, our governemt.  They support our enemies and slander our friends abroad.  They stir up class warfare and race hatred.  Their goal is complete control and absolute power.  There really aren't that many true Leftists, maybe 8, 10, 15% of the population, and most of them are the off-balance and malicious and don't realize or care who they are working for and what it is they are working toward.  Many focus on just certain aspects of our society and country to attack, although they all support each other.

The Liberal, being deluded, confused, and easily led is easy prey for the Leftist.  The Leftist, knowing they can never gain power by themselves, wrap themselves in the words and ideals of the Liberal - peace, harmony, equality, liberty, making things better.  Dare I say Hope, Change, and Bringing Us All Together.  They sure don't mind more taxes, regulations, restrictions, and sell this to the Libs on terms the Libs enjoy hearing and will support. 

Historically, when the Left acheives power, they murder their former allies - the Liberals - first, so as to not share power.  Think of Occupy - fitting the above description of Leftism perfectly, they speak in terms the Liberals like to hear and have sucked many into supporting them and even speaking on their behalf.  They make no demands, so there are no goals, because it's not about working with others towards solutions.  They pretend to have no leaders, and combined with no demands they made if difficult for opponents to show them for who and what they are.  Claiming no goals or leaders, there is nothing to be achieved except confusion, chaos, and distraction.   

Think also of the Jihadis.  It is no coincidence the Left seems to be currently in league with them, supporting Hamas, supporting the Brotherhood, constantly attacking Israel with propaganda.  Look at how closely aligned the Obama administration is to radical Islamists taking power in various countries during the 'Arab Spring' - certainly Egypt, a very important country that is home of half of all Arabs.  Last weeks uprisings and the administrations handling of it should have been pretty convincing.

In warfare, there is power and and there is will.  The side with the power does not necessarily win if the side with less or little power has more will.  The North Vietnamese had the will and the US had the power but ultimately not the will.  The Islamic Jihadis have the will.  The Left has the will.  They both appear weak, but with the amount of will they have, they are not.

[onan]

I find this tedious. Do either of you, General and Paper*Boy, ever look in a mirror? Did it ever cross your minds that a very similar post could be made for conservatism?

Change every use of liberal for conservative alter a few other words and we have the same sentiment but this time bashing conservatism.

It isn't so much I disagree as,  couldn't you be a bit more fair in your observation? Do either of you think any of the conservative "icons" from 1950 to 1990 would not be apoplectic with today's conservative? Hell if Reagan were running today I don't believe the conservative party would welcome him.


Addendum:


Who said this?

“We are proud of and shall continue our far-reaching and sound advances in matters of basic human needsâ€"expansion of social securityâ€"broadened coverage in unemployment insurance â€"improved housingâ€"and better health protection for all our people. We are determined that our government remain warmly responsive to the urgent social and economic problems of our people.”

[Ben Shockley]

I find this tedious...

Of course you're right, Onan, regarding a purely political argument.   But I think you're missing the fact that this is beyond "mere politics."  What we have here is actually sensational fodder for the "Coast to Coast" part of the forum; specifically exobiology and alien visitations.
What we have in posts like those above is the very stealthy yet unmistakable announcement of alien life on Earth.   It has to be.   The beings writing that stuff can't be from the same planet as me.   The senses are obviously calibrated totally differently; the perceptions totally unrecognizable by any human born of this reality.   Left is right, up is down, movement that appears to human senses as occurring toward one cardinal direction is perceived by these beings as movement in the opposite direction.

It isn't so much I disagree as,  couldn't you [aliens] be a bit more fair in your observation [?]

I salute your attempts to be conciliatory and find common ground with these beings.   But I invite you to remember your sci-fi movies.   Remember what happened in the 1953 "War Of The Worlds" to the little party that initially approached the Martian craft carrying a white flag?   Remember "Independence Day" and what the alien said was their goal vis-a-vis humanity?
Okay, maybe it's not that bad.   Try "Alien Nation" or "District 9."   Forget rapprochement -- because the aliens are pretty clearly not interested in close, friendly relations and certainly not in assimilation to the surrounding civilization-- and just give these creatures a "reservation" where they can conduct their business according to their odd customs and perceptions.
But for gods' sake, keep 'em penned up good and tight!   Because, remember another movie-- the 1968 "Planet Of The Apes," when Cornelius read from the ancient scroll regarding "the beast, Man:"  "he will make a waste land of your home as well as his."   Applies to alien right-wingers too.


Back to mundane politics:

Do either of you think any of the conservative "icons" from 1950 to 1990 would not be apoplectic with today's conservative? Hell if Reagan were running today I don't believe the conservative party would welcome him.

History, and any awareness of social problems, for the modern American right wing began on 20 January 2009.  Before that was only a vague halcyon "Dreamtime" of gold-paved streets and off-budget war.   It would actually be nice if their inability to remember the past could cause them to repeat it, because, at this point, I would almost welcome them running another Reagan or even Nixon; hell, I'd be ecstatic for a Dwight Eisenhower.

But despite all empirical evidence that their movement has gone off the charts to the right, and has pulled all socio-political discourse in America with them, they perceive all problems of modern America as stemming from a society-wide shift leftward --including, presumably, a perception that national-level Republican candidates have become increasingly "Leftist."

The only possible rational explanation for this argument is that the political label "left(ist/ism)" has become an epithet so methodically overused by their propagandist-gurus that it has lost any coherent meaning whatsoever, and is simply applied to, and as an explanation for, "any recognizable social ill."   Any perceived "social problem" is automatically and invariably decried by right-wing propagandists as "the result of 'leftist' policy" --without rhyme or reason, without reference to whether other problems so labeled had been similar to, or totally different from, today's "leftist problems."
In such a condition, any perception on the part of rank-and-file right-wingers of "worsening social problems" can only be, and naturally will be, attributed to "the left" --regardless of the nature of the problems, even regardless of how obviously disparate the nature of the problems may be to the more-perceptive right-winger.

It is situational, synthetic scapegoating via labeling.    It's the only way to keep them from noticing --and possibly acting to correct-- the structural and systemic origins of their own worsening lives and social conditions.   What we see in here is how effective and comforting the scapegoating is, and how willingly some people completely internalize and perpetuate it.


Like I said: the aliens are truly here.   They're over there! -- to your right!

[Zircon]

I find this tedious. Do either of you, General and Paper*Boy, ever look in a mirror? Did it ever cross your minds that a very similar post could be made for conservatism?

Change every use of liberal for conservative alter a few other words and we have the same sentiment but this time bashing conservatism.

It isn't so much I disagree as,  couldn't you be a bit more fair in your observation? Do either of you think any of the conservative "icons" from 1950 to 1990 would not be apoplectic with today's conservative? Hell if Reagan were running today I don't believe the conservative party would welcome him.


Addendum:


Who said this?

Onan, sorry to break in here but, the crux of the post you're referring to deals with "Leftists" and how they have corrupted the ideals of "Liberal" thought. Change is inevitable regardless of one's political or social bent. Those who would use "Conservatism" to advance their own agendas can also corrupt the ideals of that particular train of thought.

I think you're right about Reagan being shown the door today unless he could be used like Obama was. I recall John F. Kennedy, a liberal democrat. Sounds more like a strong fiscal/military conservative if he was running today with the same platform that got him elected in 1960. He did have his problems with big business however and his tinkering with the power of the bankers cost him his life.

[onan]

I dunno, Zircon. Seems to me like mud slinging. Leftist, progressive, liberal, and democrat all seem to be used for derision.

I am tired of it. I could easily pull down youtube videos, news sites that show the incompetency on the right. Hell I could spend a week doing Santorum alone.

So I find it hard to understand the (what I consider) unreasoned, non-critical thinking, and biased arguments brought forth by several members of this forum.

[Zircon]

I dunno, Zircon. Seems to me like mud slinging. Leftist, progressive, liberal, and democrat all seem to be used for derision.

I am tired of it. I could easily pull down youtube videos, news sites that show the incompetency on the right. Hell I could spend a week doing Santorum alone.

So I find it hard to understand the (what I consider) unreasoned, non-critical thinking, and biased arguments brought forth by several members of this forum.

Then you agree with me in how the media is used by both. The left trashes the right with youtube videos etc. and the right does it to the left. Whatever it is you're looking for you can find. I'm sure you could find plenty of videos knocking anything GOP, Tea Party, conservative etc.

Here is the thing however. The "right" realizes they are at a disadvantage because other than AM radio, Fox news (most of it anyway) and some websites, there have no voice. The right spends more time vetting their information. The left will go so far as to invent insults, slurs and character assassinations without fear of being called out to verify their claims while the right will most certainly be called out to verify. Because they can far more often than the left, the media ignores them and their claims go unreported by the MSM.

[onan]

Here is the thing however. The "right" realizes they are at a disadvantage because other than AM radio, Fox news (most of it anyway) and some websites, there have no voice. The right spends more time vetting their information. The left will go so far as to invent insults, slurs and character assassinations without fear of being called out to verify their claims while the right will most certainly be called out to verify. Because they can far more often than the left, the media ignores them and their claims go unreported by the MSM.

I completely disagree with this. And I squarely blame Rupert Murdoch. No one holds fox news accountable.

[Zircon]

I completely disagree with this. And I squarely blame Rupert Murdoch. No one holds fox news accountable.

Who holds MSNBC accountable? How about NBC, CBS and ABC? You have many fingers to use Onan. If you're going to call one network out then I suggest you be objective and dispense with the filter of tolerance you're applying.

And what is it about Fox News that you find "unaccountable"? The fact that they don't parrot the same lines and mantras as the other networks? Do you want information or conformity? They provide words and video to back their positions when they disagree.

[slipstream]

I completely disagree with this. And I squarely blame Rupert Murdoch. No one holds fox news accountable.

What about Media Matters?

[onan]

What about Media Matters?

Interesting question. does it not give you pause that the reason media matters arose was to counter the information that fox news was broadcasting?

I don't go to media matters often. the last time I think was right after Katrina. and as I remember it they were pretty accurate on their responses.

And as far as I can tell media matters has been marginalized. A quick anecdote... A friend of mine had just moved back to Buffalo when Katrina hit. He immediately started sending me emails filled with the partial/inaccurate reporting from fox news. I responded with some info from media matters and he was quick to respond how biased my information was. just sayin.

[onan]

Who holds MSNBC accountable? How about NBC, CBS and ABC? You have many fingers to use Onan. If you're going to call one network out then I suggest you be objective and dispense with the filter of tolerance you're applying.

And what is it about Fox News that you find "unaccountable"? The fact that they don't parrot the same lines and mantras as the other networks? Do you want information or conformity? They provide words and video to back their positions when they disagree.

No no they don't. fox and friends is so inaccurate in their statements... I don't even know how to finish the statement. I am not really interested in digging up and compiling all the misinformation then comparing it to other networks. so let me be unequivocal here. I don't like any talking head that makes their opinion part of the news. that being said I find fox and eib to be the worst offenders.

[slipstream]

Interesting question. does it not give you pause that the reason media matters arose was to counter the information that fox news was broadcasting?

No, not really.  All the corporate media have problems.

[Zircon]

No no they don't. fox and friends is so inaccurate in their statements... I don't even know how to finish the statement. I am not really interested in digging up and compiling all the misinformation then comparing it to other networks. so let me be unequivocal here. I don't like any talking head that makes their opinion part of the news. that being said I find fox and eib to be the worst offenders.

If you're watching "Opinion" shows then you're going to get an opinion. OK Onan, you think Fox is propaganda from the right and others are far more objective and truthful. So, I don't know where to finish that either. If you've determined Fox is crap why do you watch it? I do watch MSNBC and CNN as well. I look for reported content. Major disconnects with what is really happening and going unreported by the left. Sorry, but we most definitely disagree with our assessments of news reporting.

[The General]

Seems to me like mud slinging. Leftist, progressive, liberal, and democrat all seem to be used for derision.

I am tired of it. I could easily pull down youtube videos, news sites that show the incompetency on the right. Hell I could spend a week doing Santorum alone.

So I find it hard to understand the (what I consider) unreasoned, non-critical thinking, and biased arguments brought forth by several members of this forum.

I find this tedious. Do either of you, General and Paper*Boy, ever look in a mirror? Did it ever cross your minds that a very similar post could be made for conservatism?

Change every use of liberal for conservative alter a few other words and we have the same sentiment but this time bashing conservatism.

It isn't so much I disagree as,  couldn't you be a bit more fair in your observation? Do either of you think any of the conservative "icons" from 1950 to 1990 would not be apoplectic with today's conservative? Hell if Reagan were running today I don't believe the conservative party would welcome him.

Onan, I agree with you.  The whole paradigm has shifted.  Bush was a liberal.  A big government liberal.  There is very little conservative party representation any longer on the right.  Ron Paul is the biggest exception I can think of as remaining conservative. 

I've conversed enough with you, Onan, to know that you are a classical liberal.  And my hat is off to you, you have what I consider to be wonderful American values.  And although we may disagree on policy, I wouldn't categorize you as a leftist.  Ben, on the other hand, is part of the new left.  The new left is very good at one thing: demonizing the right.  Ben is a self confessed socialist.  Not a liberal.

My point here is not to belittle anyone or sling any mud.  My point here is only to try and show those good liberals that still think like JFK that they are voting for the wrong people.  They are voting for people that have Leftist values, but cloak themselves in the arguments of the liberal. 

I'm saying that the current presidential race is between a liberal and a leftist.  I'm voting for the liberal, Mitt Romney, since he is my only choice.  He is not a conservative in my opinion.   But I cannot vote for Obama the leftist.  There is a big difference. 

[The General]

this chart may help make my point.

[Eddie Coyle]

             Dateline: About 5 months from now...
         

      Yesterday, as I walked from Quadrant 3, by the Gorky Statue in front of the Lumumba Pavillion adjacent to the Ford Foundation mosque, I could have sworn I saw my brother through the wire. I yelled toward him, and of course the two blue helmets frowned upon this. The larger blue helmet, who had been one of Charles Taylor's child soldiers gave me a baleful look, and the smaller blue helmet lectured me in Esperanto about my outburst. Wasn't I aware that I wasn't allowed to speak until the fourth day and 7th hour of Brumaire? For this infraction, I was sent to the Daniel Ortega/Alexander Berkman detention center to make an appointment for another round of reeducation that would take place at the Huey Newton/Elena Ceausescu facility.

               
           In the camps, there's loose talk that our calendar may be changed again. Sept 11 will be "Allende Day" and Sept 12 "Biko Day", Sept 13, "Attica Day". Notable victims of imperialist and racist oppression will be represented on the calendar, however the calendar will be extended from 365 days to 13,781 days because Imam Obama keeps finding more martyrs. Oh yeah, Emperor Obama became Imam Obama yesterday when Bernie Sanders passed that bill through the House and Senate with a unanimous vote of 1-0. Good thing for Bernie that they haven't reached the S's yet in the Jew extermination plan that Mayor Ahmedinejad is conducting.

            "If only I'd voted for Romney and Ryan" was scrawled in feces on the bathroom wall. While, vice emperor Biden got a kick out of that because it was taking a page from the IRA dirty protests something the Imam and he admired, but the message itself was so loathesome, that whoever did it was going to have to be crucified. Serves them right. Well gotta go, because there's a Billy Bragg sings Chomsky concert down at the Paul Robeson/Bernadine Dohrn atrium.

           

[Pragmier]

this chart may help make my point.

So to sum up.
Left=all the bad stuff. Right=all the good stuff.

Why not call it Libertarian then? You hinted as much and that sure looks like their platform.

[The General]

So to sum up.
Left=all the bad stuff. Right=all the good stuff.

Why not call it Libertarian then? You hinted as much and that sure looks like their platform.

I didn't make the chart up.  These terms do have definitions.  If the terms leftist and liberal are going to be synonymous from now on, we need to redefine the terms.  That's my point, the lines have become blurred.

[The General]

and Eddie, I enjoyed your parody of my paranoia.

[Eddie Coyle]

and Eddie, I enjoyed your parody of my paranoia.

I could do a similar parody about Romney/Ryan getting elected but that barrel of laughs Mark Potok and the SPLC would miss the irony, and put MV on a hate list.

           Though we might be there already...

[Zircon]

             Dateline: About 5 months from now...
         

      Yesterday, as I walked from Quadrant 3, by the Gorky Statue in front of the Lumumba Pavillion adjacent to the Ford Foundation mosque, I could have sworn I saw my brother through the wire. I yelled toward him, and of course the two blue helmets frowned upon this. The larger blue helmet, who had been one of Charles Taylor's child soldiers gave me a baleful look, and the smaller blue helmet lectured me in Esperanto about my outburst. Wasn't I aware that I wasn't allowed to speak until the fourth day and 7th hour of Brumaire? For this infraction, I was sent to the Daniel Ortega/Alexander Berkman detention center to make an appointment for another round of reeducation that would take place at the Huey Newton/Elena Ceausescu facility.

               
           In the camps, there's loose talk that our calendar may be changed again. Sept 11 will be "Allende Day" and Sept 12 "Biko Day", Sept 13, "Attica Day". Notable victims of imperialist and racist oppression will be represented on the calendar, however the calendar will be extended from 365 days to 13,781 days because Imam Obama keeps finding more martyrs. Oh yeah, Emperor Obama became Imam Obama yesterday when Bernie Sanders passed that bill through the House and Senate with a unanimous vote of 1-0. Good thing for Bernie that they haven't reached the S's yet in the Jew extermination plan that Mayor Ahmedinejad is conducting.

            "If only I'd voted for Romney and Ryan" was scrawled in feces on the bathroom wall. While, vice emperor Biden got a kick out of that because it was taking a page from the IRA dirty protests something the Imam and he admired, but the message itself was so loathesome, that whoever did it was going to have to be crucified. Serves them right. Well gotta go, because there's a Billy Bragg sings Chomsky concert down at the Paul Robeson/Bernadine Dohrn atrium.

           

An excellent "futurist" account Eddie. You should be a writer. Reminds me of "Red Dawn" in a way when the son (Swayze sp?) was speaking with his father.

[Zircon]

Onan, I agree with you.  The whole paradigm has shifted.  Bush was a liberal.  A big government liberal.  There is very little conservative party representation any longer on the right.  Ron Paul is the biggest exception I can think of as remaining conservative.

General I can actually agree with you that Romney is a northeastern republican and that is a liberal by traditional GOP standards. Note how I qualified that as "traditional". I think Nixon and Ford were a hybrids and Reagan was surrounded by proponents of the NWO including Bush - who he was basically strong-armed into selecting as his VP.

I've commented on how there isn't much difference at all between the republicans and democrats as all candidates are vetted by those who actually do the deciding. The eventual nominees are "approved" to run against one another where the real power will not be threatened regardless of the outcome.

I too respect Onan. He sticks to his guns and I like the fact he tries to converse without angst. Something I need to work on even though what may be perceived as anger towards him really isn't.

I still view persons who are truly benevolent and try to make the society better through positive, constructive change as an asset to our society. Also, if it ain't broken then don't try to fix or replace it. I grew up a democrat and a liberal one at that. But the "left" has highjacked the democratic party and this forced me away. Mind you I voted for McGovern and Carter ... so you can see I've changed. I agree about Ron Paul being a true conservative. By so being, he stood a snowball's chance in hell of being the GOP nominee.

[BobGrau]

A great album. Finally, politics I can relate to.

Leftfield - Leftism [Full Album]

[analog kid]

I didn't make the chart up.  These terms do have definitions.  If the terms leftist and liberal are going to be synonymous from now on, we need to redefine the terms.  That's my point, the lines have become blurred.

It's a chart, therefore must be true.

Can you find another news organization that doctors photos like this, or that skews graphs like this? There's a slew of examples of the latter.

[The General]

It's a chart, therefore must be true.

Can you find another news organization that doctors photos like this, or that skews graphs like this? There's a slew of examples of the latter.

Why is it that any discussion of left/right politics always turns into some dissection of Fox news?  I never mentioned Fox news.  I didn't reference Fox news.  I don't watch Fox news.  I don't watch television for that matter.  Fox news, like all news channels, exists for one purpose: ratings.  If you are looking for objective truth, TV news is not the place to find it.  We all agree on that. 

So, I try to talk politics, and I get "Fox news sucks, therefore you are wrong." 

[The General]

As long as we're talking about media bias, try this experiment.  Google the terms "extreme right wing" and "extreme left wing" (with the quotes) and see which one has more results.  And go ahead and browse those results.  Presumably one cannot be too far to the left.

"extreme right wing"
google search results
5.5 million

"extreme left wing"
google search results
1.2 million results.

Conservatives are routinely labeled as "extreme."  Has any US media outlet EVER called someone like Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, or Barack Obama part of the "extreme left wing?"  What would someone have to do to be deemed too far to the left?

[onan]

As long as we're talking about media bias, try this experiment.  Google the terms "extreme right wing" and "extreme left wing" (with the quotes) and see which one has more results.  And go ahead and browse those results.  Presumably one cannot be too far to the left.

"extreme right wing"
google search results
5.5 million

"extreme left wing"
google search results
1.2 million results.

Conservatives are routinely labeled as "extreme."  Has any US media outlet EVER called someone like Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, or Barack Obama part of the "extreme left wing?"  What would someone have to do to be deemed too far to the left?

I was taught a truism when I was young.

If one person comes up and says Joe is an asshole. There is a good chance that person doesn't get along with Joe. If another person comes up and says Joe is an asshole, it would be sensible to say Joe may be having a bad day. If a third person comes up to you and says Joe is an asshole. Joe is most likely an asshole.

I would consider that the news is biased. I would even consider there may be a way to quantify that. But google biased? That is more anonymous and less focused than any could argue.
Also what is extreme? And who is measuring?

[The General]

I was taught a truism when I was young.

If one person comes up and says Joe is an asshole. There is a good chance that person doesn't get along with Joe. If another person comes up and says Joe is an asshole, it would be sensible to say Joe may be having a bad day. If a third person comes up to you and says Joe is an asshole. Joe is most likely an asshole.

I would consider that the news is biased. I would even consider there may be a way to quantify that. But google biased? That is more anonymous and less focused than any could argue.
Also what is extreme? And who is measuring?

My contention is not that google is biased.  It is simply a non-biased way of seeing what people are saying in blogs, articles, news pieces, etc.  Think of it as taking a snap shot of the entire internet. 

But you are proving my point.  Your bias shows when you infer that those on the left are by definition not extreme.  I'm saying that extremes exist on both sides.  I admit, in today's political landscape, I could be categorized as extreme right wing.  But so would JFK. 

[McPhallus]

As long as we're talking about media bias, try this experiment.  Google the terms "extreme right wing" and "extreme left wing" (with the quotes) and see which one has more results.  And go ahead and browse those results.  Presumably one cannot be too far to the left.

"extreme right wing"
google search results
5.5 million

"extreme left wing"
google search results
1.2 million results.

Conservatives are routinely labeled as "extreme."  Has any US media outlet EVER called someone like Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, or Barack Obama part of the "extreme left wing?"  What would someone have to do to be deemed too far to the left?

Isn't this just an issue of terminology, though?  "Extreme right wing" is a rather nebulous term.  Conservatives usually refer to the "extreme left" as "communist" (77.9M), "socialist" (67.2M), "anarchist" (14.4M), and "leftist," (15.5M).  At least these terms are fairly specific.  The media tends to just say, "liberal" or "democratic."