It seems as though I'm really enjoying Centre Right, mainly because it truly offers the ability to debate some issues...though not on their site. The latest thing to catch my eye is the idea we're being taxed to our limit. Tim Montgomerie has quickly highlighted that some senior official has said we're on the limit, while Charlie Elphicke takes it further by stating taxes are up £10,000 since 1997. So what's my beef here?

It seems as though the issue of presumed consent blew up quite loudly in the end which is good to see, it needs to be debated and it is quite literally everywhere except the headline news right now. But in the debate there have been some things come up which are worth some clarification or further discussion, in some cases because they're not necessarily true, and in others because they're being used as arguments against change without any real thought going into such arguments. I'm going to tackle the following issues that have been raised from both sides

• "Doctors will feel the need to let us die quicker for our organs"
• "This is state ownership of my body"
• "There will be huge screw ups and scandals because of opt-out"
• "What about sudden deaths?"
• "This is an anti-religious policy"
• "I'll opt out in protest despite being a donor"
• "Who cares, when you're dead you're dead"
• "Surely a free market on organs is the way forward?"
• "Why don't we try asking first?"

With all the fuss at the moment being focused on South Carolina you'd be forgiven for thinking, as I did, that it is the next on the trail. In fact it is Michigan next, though only really for the Republicans, then Nevada before stopping off at South Carolina. So what's the deal here? I can understand Michigan falling off the map for many liberal reporters as the democrats have punished the state by saying no delegates can go to national conference on their behalf, but Nevada is there and crying out for attention, and being the western most state so far it is also an interesting insight into another geographical demographic.

Perhaps the reason is that it is another round of caucuses rather than easier to report on primaries, or perhaps it is because Clinton has generally enjoyed a double figure lead over Obama, but all of that has suddenly changed. A poll on the CNN site shows that far from the 20+ point leads Clinton had through late 2007, a December poll finds her less than 10 points ahead. Fast forward to this weekend and polls are actually starting to say that Obama is in the lead, albeit just by a nose.

Over at CentreRight, a new circle jerk for Tory bloggers (you can't post comments, only read what the overlords want you to, and watch them converse amongst one another with much back slapping and snide looks over the parapet) there is a post by Peter Cuthbertson seems to aim to counter an American blog about conservative myths. Now the original article at Washington Monthly is clearly a bit tongue in cheek while also being pretty much true that they stand up as myths, and Peter has decided to take him up on his challenge of helping him to find 5 myths about liberals

Quite frankly what he's come up with is mind boggling and not really in tune with the original articles request of being demonstrably false. let's take a look at these "myths"