Funny but I hear more Obama bashing coming from the liberals - NYT for example and Clintons own supporters - than I do from conservatives.. Fox news for example has been very easy on him..O'Reilly even defending him from the outrage surrounding his wifes comments.

As for the media, anything to sell circulation -not to mention how much fun it is to bash the guy on top vs. who's on the bottom.

The problem with this election is the media hype, who inturn created the Obama hype!

Obama maybe hasn't shown any meat in his speeches, but then, he apparently doesn't have to - he helps sell stories

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The untouchable status can't last forever. obama had an unusually long run. The party's over and now he's another guy running for office about to take the lumps that go along with it. He must answer 'real' questions, stop preaching and talk to us. We don't need another cheer leader in the White House. Time for him to grow up. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

anyone running, I mean anyone running for any office in this country is fair game, any person holding public office or has a government job is fair game, even BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Attacks just starting? Maybe. I expect that they will get darn right nasty but soon.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama's had a bit of a honeymoon with the media, who seemed fascinated that a black man could not be angry, but now things are getting real. He could actually beat Hillary, which for many (I think of David Brooks) is less than they hoped for. I wrote the Times a letter about his absurd flip-flop.

Although Obama shows plenty of substance, it's my hunch that he has the resilience of another successful politician, Ronald Reagan, and even when journalists act like two Ivy League degrees are no big deal, they do respect grace under pressure.

How many times can John McCain do his "I'm a maverick" act? He supported torture last week.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Finally. I don't like attacks on anyone, but the ones leveled at Hillary Clinton have been so overwhelming and the left-wing media so reluctant to admit them, that if Barack Obama is now fair game, it's about time. Let's stop all the attacks, not just the ones on him.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In my opinion, Hillary is getting the biggest pass of all by the mainstream media. They apparently feel that it is entirely acceptable for her to serve another term or two, this time as top dog co-president, even though she was co-president for eight years already. It is technically legal. But every time she says she will be ready on day one, I think -- well, if we wanted someone completely ready on day one of a third term in the White House, we wouldn’t have term limits.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is all crap.

Nobody expected Obama, a Black Man, to even have a chance at becoming the President of the United States. Well now America is surprising a lot of you and you can’t deal with it. America isn’t listening to the media’s passive aggressive racist’s rambling anymore. We’ve figured out what your game is and we are not playing.

First of all, Obama has never been short on details. You can read them on his web site if you are REALLY interested.

Secondly, nobody goes to a political rally to hear a position paper on policy. They go to a political rally to become inspired; to get the measure of the person running for office; to get some idea of the kind of leadership this person would bring to that office. THAT'S WHY THEY CALL IT A RALLY.

When I want to know the details of their policies, I read their position papers.

Thirdly, I didn't hear McCain or Romney or Huckabee making detailed position statements during their campaign speeches. But I forget, they are white guys. They don’t have to prove anything.

This is sooooo typical. Change the rules when things are not turning out as you expected.

And as for the opinions of the media, if you recall they are the ones who lead us all merrily into the Hell we are in today. Obama and his team caught the media off guard; that’s why they are attacking. They are scared he might win.

Change you can believe in, baby.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

whatever.

blahBLAHblah.

the point is: both Dem candidates get to spend all their media time 'refuting' attacks from one another & the Reich Wing.

fecking convenient, isn't it?

I mean, it might mean someone would take the time to LOOK AT THEIR CORPORATIZED PLATFORMS long enough to notice that THE US ELECTORATE is swallowing WHATEVER the Democratic candidates feel they 'can allow their citizens'...

... if the US Electorate stopped playing Reality TV debates on the 2 candidates, they might have a chance to NEGOTIATE THE DEMOCRATIC PLATFORMS to an actual POPULIST REFORM.

nope. its more fun shrieking like grade school children & throwing temper tantrums about FAIRNESS.

you get the democracy you're willing to defend... but everyone's more interested in the CANDIDATE & IMAGE MANAGEMENTthan actual platform content.

& NEITHER has anything to write home about.

ITS UP TO YOU: either you DEFINE & NEGOTIATE the platforms of your candidates
OR
let the CORPORATE BACKERS do the negotiating while you're away from the Table shrieking like children relegated to the Kiddie Table.

~~~
Spread Love...

BlueBerry Pick'n
can be found @
ThisCanadian
~~~
"We, two, form a Multitude" ~ Ovid.
~~~
"Silent Freedom is Freedom Silenced"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nah, the media will only poke & prod a bit so that the race is competitive - or at least competitive seeming. The media wants him to be president - he will move much more copy than McCain.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ms. Noonan is the perfect example of how the media jumps on any point to get coverage. I think the public sees through the smokescreens, just by look ing at the polls between Clinton and Obama. As long as Obama sticks to his same plan and his stamina holds, he should have no problem.

My advice to the media is to go for honesty and avoid sensationalism. The American people are burned out from the b.s. of the right wingers, and our cup will soon runneth over with the failed economy. The candidate and media who best addresses our concerns stands the best chance of staying power.

With $5 gas, food skyrocketing, and the bill collector howling by November, McCain, O'Reilly, Limbaugh and the likes better run for cover.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

That's what the Clinton campaign seems bent on committing. The harshness and the attacking are aimed at mortally wounding (figuratively) her opponent. Rather than focusing on her accomplishments and her plans to turn the country away from the policies of the Bush years, her campaign is hell bent on destroying the credibility of Obama. Attack his qualifications, attack his integrity, try to misrepresent his religious affiliation -- none of which will help when the campaign becomes the final one between Republican and Democrat. No matter who the Democratic candidate is -- can he/she survive this sort of campaign? Can either candidate emerge from the primaries still viable?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Role of the corporate media seems to be to narrow our choices either by character assasination (ala Dean, Kerry and Gore), ridicule (Kucinich) or make candidates who won't pay to play disappear by refusing to cover them.
I had my doubts about Obama. His Senate record wasn't encouraging and he in hock to same bad actors that pull Bush and Clinton's strings.
The fact that the MSM find him enough of a threat is recommendation. They suspect he might actually do something that benefits ordinary Americans or they wouldn't be trying to take him out.
It seems all Americans need to do to get better government is to listen to media coverage a little differently; elect the people the MSM crucify and support the agenda the MSM warn against.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Notice how Obama,who last year was the hope, is morphing into a "politician as usual"? For months it was all Hillary, Hillary, Hillary. Hillary was going to win, Hillary had raised more money, etc. Then, as Obama began winning primaries and caucuses, suddenly the media flip-flopped and it was all Obama. The upshot is, the media are CREATING the news, not reporting it.
McCain, the over-the-hill hawk, supports endless war and, of all things, torture - can he be more UN-American? Yet the media support him???
What no one has brought out is that all three are currently Senators, missing votes on crucial legislation and generally ignoring the mega-salary jobs they're being paid our tax dollars to do.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yes, here come the attacks on Obama. However, it was naive of Boehlert to say that "long-term campaign press coverage has almost nothing to do with the candidate's policies." The "negative narrative" becomes inevitable with any slightly left, populist candidate. To be a populist means not to be exclusively dependent on the big donors. It means the possibility of the candidate responding to the real interests of ordinary people.

The corporate and wealth-oriented major media will attack the popular. Other than our left alternative media, there is no support for even a moderate populist.

Boehlers suggests press passivity: they "are persuaded," they "panic," and "absorb" right-wing talking points. But they are quite active. Aside from the rare breed who are investigative journalists, there is no liberal or moderate or fair-minded major media. There are only lots of major media paid jobs. Again, that's why we read alternative journalism and why even the rather centrist but popular Obama will be attacked in all major outlets.

For a different perspective see my "On Million Donors Dollars" at www.nightingaleatlarge.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Meanwhile, in Sunday's New York Times, Obama was twice described as being overly effeminate: He's an "elusive starlet" who prefers "playing the tease," while espousing a "feminine management style."

I used to think Media Matters was better than this, not sloppy. Sorry, but Maureen Dowd's commentaries on Obama's style are compliments, not attacks. Add to this a assaults on MSNBC, especially Chris Mathews, and you are beginning to lose credibility. Look, Media Matters has been used by a campaign, hardly a model watchdog for journalists it markets itself as.

Media Matters staff should know better than to fall for the B-M public relations campaign it is doing for their client. Come on, figure it out. This is what they do. And they do it very well. So well that their fingerprints are rarely on the spin.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The media as mouthpiece to corporate power remains the greatest manipulator of truth and disseminator of lies in this country, leaving no field of dreams unturned in their quest for control of the public brain. Why else would we be engaged in an endless, costly war that gets less primetime attention than who wins or who loses on American Idol or which sad 'celebritney' is in rehab this week.... Marshall McLuhan was right when he stated that the medium is the message, for we have endured over the past generation disastrous corporate buyouts and shakedowns of that most vital and necessary of democratic institutions, the 'free press'. And the lasting pity of it is, our pathetic congress allowed this corporate coup to happen without so much as a whimper of complaint or inquiry, much as they allowed this war and all its terrible consequences to 'happen'.
As for Barack Obama, I believe that he has the moral and intellectual stamina to withstand the growing character assaults from within his party and without. It is up to us, the American people, to stand tall with him against the pernicious fearmongers and corporate media mercenaries who would love to derail his historic quest for the White House. We simply cannot allow the corporate-controlled pundits and puppet prognosticators to attack this gifted and noble human being without cause.
Barack Obama's powerful message of renewal, resurrection and hope is, I believe, intended to heal the immense psychic wounds that we as a nation incurred on and since September 11th, 2001, and as an African-American of mixed parentage, he is also uniquely capable of healing the even deeper psychic wounds of our nation's troubled past and difficult present. Too many are still without hope, too many have been ignored or bypassed on the road to opportunity and prosperity, especially our young men and women of color. The only doors that have opened for countless young men are those that immediately close with a lock and a key. Education, hope, empowerment, are insufferably empty words, for they have little meaning to children caught up in the endless cycle of violence, crime and punishment in our desperate inner cities, places where 'hope' translates as surviving one more day without being shot. This is the message that Barack Obama delivers, the coded message that is addressed to the children of Altgeld in Chicago, of the South Bronx, of South Central Los Angeles, of everywhere in America that children live without hope. A precious truth is passed from person to person, that we are all in this country, this world together, connected to one another, responsible for one another. An enduring truth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Get off your backsides, quit sucking your thumbs and do something about it.
I returned from an Obama town hall meeting in Texas to learn from my grandson that his public school teacher was doing her part to lie about Obama.
Consider her paraphrased statement to my grandson:

I will never vote for Obama, because he never pledges allegiance to the American Flag.

I wrote a simple but formal faxed complaint the very next morning and sent it to her superior, the school principal.
I wrote that I was writing to him regarding a very serious matter and that I was appalled that a supposed professional in our school district would make such a vicious and untrue statement to an impressionable adolescent or a group of them.
I kept my complaint short and simple. I sent him the definition of the crime of hate speech, as defined by Wikipedia, and asked what the remedy and school or school board policy was for this type of infraction. I let the words and letter of the law speak for itself.
And I asked for his prompt attention to this matter.
He called me four hours later and asked for the name of the person involved because I had omitted it intentionally. I mentioned that I feared retaliation for my grandson and he guaranteed that if retaliation occurred, that would be another infraction and he would deal with it personally.
The principal confided that he had just sent out a scatter shot and official warning to all teachers and employees at his school against this very thing and that he knew he now needed to address it to this specific individual.
He also guaranteed the complaint and his corrective actions would be forwarded to the school superintendent.
I will follow up next week with a thank you note and ask, specifically, about the outcome of my complaint.
Next, I watched a previously taped version of the Clinton/Obama debate on Friday night and heard Brian Williams ask Obama how he will compete with McCain's "respected" experience on matters of national security.
Afterward, I sent an Email to Mr. Williams (nightly@nbc.com) and reminded him of the fact that McCain got it wrong (along with Bush and Cheney) on Iraq and that Obama's superior insight had provided him with better "judgement" on matters of national security.
Generally speaking, these opportunities to push back (metaphorically speaking) come one at a time,need to be addressed one at a time and where you live.
Let the media and other hate mongers know now, they will be called on to explain and/or defend their behaviors.
Stop complaining and sharpen your pencils, get Email addresses to your local and national media personalities and hold them accountable.
Time to stand up people. Our country can not stand under eight more years of Republican blundering and crime.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Marbw, posted this yesterday. I’m reposting it here because it’s such a poignant clip that has gotten so little attention. It underlines the point that Senator Clinton has no answer to the charge that she's making against Senator Obama (a common theme the past 6 weeks). Voters who pay attention realize that despite all her slogans about her opponent (like "he's all rhetoric and no reality"), it's she who has nothing to back up her claims. Unfortunately for Senator Clinton, it appears that the "people who pay attention" is a growing demographic.

From the National Journal, March 1, 2008
“It was, in this reporter's opinion, the most interesting moment in today's Clinton campaign phoner with reporters. Responding to the release of HRC's new TX TV ad, which asserts in no subtle terms that only she has the experience to deal with a major world crisis, and, relatedly, to keep your children safe, Slate's John Dickerson asked the obvious question:
"What foreign policy moment would you point to in Hillary's career where she's been tested by crisis?" he said.

Silence on the call. You could've knit a sweater in the time it took the usually verbose team of Mark Penn, Howard Wolfson and Lee Feinstein, Clinton's national security director, to find a cogent answer. And what they came up with was weak -- that she's been endorsed by many high ranking members of the uniformed military.”
Listen Here

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Basic training is over for Obama. From this point forward, it's going to be the kind of nasty siege warfare we're used to seeing. But I think he's ready. He KNEW that this was coming, sooner or later. You'd have to be brain-dead not to. As in the real world, what's going to define Obama is not what happens to him, but how he handles it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WHY AREN'T BROOKS, NOONAN, KRISTOL, ETC., PAYING WITH THE LOSS OF JOURNALISTIC STATUS FOR THEIR FULL FRONTAL SUPPORT OF BUSH ADMINISTRATION LIES, WHICH CONTINUE TO CAUSE THE DEATHS OF 4,000 PLUS AMERICAN SOLDIERS AND A HUNDRED THOUSAND PLUS IRAQIS? THEY ARE CERTAINLY PARTIALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SOILING OF OUR GREAT COUNTRY'S REPUTATION WORLDWIDE AND THE BANKRUPTING OF OUR ECONOMY.
WHY IS THERE NO RECOURSE TO ADMONISH THEM?
HOW CAN THOSE LIARS DAVID BROOKS, BILL KRISTOL, AND ALL THE REST STILL BE HIRED BY SHOWS TO PONTIFICATE AFTER BEING SO COMPLETELY WRONG? THEY TRIED TO HIDE THE FACTS AT EVERY TURN CONCERNING THIS CRAZY WAR AND OUR CRAZIER ADMINISTRATION. WHY ARE THEY STILL HIRED AS TV EXPERTS WHEN THEY HAVE FAILED SO MISERABLY TO SPEAK THE TRUTH? WHY AREN'T THEY BENCHED, AT LEAST FOR ONE ELECTION CYCLE?
WHY ARE THEY STILL TALKING????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's a foregone conclusion that the shit's gonna spin hard and to the right.

America is a one party state.


Government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Direct Democracy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The mainstream media has a vested interest in perpetuating the Democratic Primaries because they get most of the campaign money in ad dollars.
So they have their own version of "flip-flop", going between Obama and Clinton, pumping the system for as many ad dollars as they can get. When the time is right, they will focus on a single Democratic candidate and repeat the process with that candidate and McCain until November. Perhaps a bit beyond.
Remember, mainstream media is a (small) group of corporations ... their only motivation is profit. And while profit motivation is not in itself wrong, anything taken to extremes is "not good for ya", to quote George Carlin. The mainstream media is more extreme than ever. Just compare Keith Olbermann to Bill O'Reilly and remember they play the comparison themselves for ratings.
We need to get back to the days before Reagan, when the media was required to do news as a public service, in an unbiased fashion. You know, to pay back the public for use of OUR airwaves. Commentary is OK ... but only when it's secondary to the news and clearly labeled as commentary. Listen up Fox News. At least Olbermann and Air America are honest about their bias!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

About two weeks ago I predicted that the MSM would quickly change their tune about Obama once it became clear that he has a good chance of winning the nomination. Remember: The MSM are corporate-owned and get their marching orders from the folks who sit on the boards of the Fortune 500.
Obama is unacceptable to these folks because he very likely would upset the status quo -- jeopardize all the billions of dollars they make from our goofy domestic and foreign policies and our endless wars.
And of course they probably will prevail. It's now likely that, regardless of who wins today's primaries, the Hillary faction, aided by the corporate mafia, will steal the nomination from Obama to ensure the status quo is perpetuated. Ain't democracy grand?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Democrats, by falling into lock step behind the Americon Idol candidacy, have cost our citizens universal health care. Those of us who viewed Obama as a questionable investment when compared to Clinton have been virtually shouted down by Obama (only "cynics" don't support me) and his supporters who insinuate that race informs all opinions not Obama. Obama folks played the race card first in knocking Clinton on the MLK/LBJ issue. Obama divided our party further by dissing skeptics as cynics. Then he and his wife handed patriotic Americans that may have happily have voted for him all they need to say no to Obama as Commander in Chief.

It is not that the Obamas are unpatriotic. We don't know that. It is that they are INEXPERIENCED, exactly what Clinton and others have been saying for weeks. Obama's misstatements on bombing Pakistan, his taking off his US flag lapel pin while asking us to make him Commander in Chief, and his wife's Oprah Moment were not wrong. They were just collossally STUPID if you're running for President.

Shame, shame, shame on Democrats. We had it so good. We had the next 16 yrs of the Executive Branch virtually locked up with an A team for all time. And then we retired our star quarterback and inexplicably handed the team leadership over to an inexperienced second stringer. Democrats continue to show themselves completely unprepared for prime time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The president shouldn't be seen as the end-all, be-all that's gonna make our country over in his image. We've just had 8 years of a very powerful president, and it hasn't been good for democracy.

I want a powerful congress instead. They are the ones who, according to that little thing called the constitution, should be getting things done and making laws, not the president.

The argument that Hillary and her supporters make that she will be able to hit the ground running and fix everything doesn't win me over. In fact, it scares me. It's a clear indication that she would do nothing to scale back the powers of the imperial presidency, and we would just end with a democratic queen instead of a republican king.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

To hell with the mainstream media. That's just the opinion of maybe 3 or 4 people, the few who own it. Turn it off.

Thank heaven for the Internet. And that's why they want to control it.

http://www.barackobama.com/tv

Compare the candidates yourself, then decide. Wake up, think for yourself. Get up, stand up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just last week, we saw how a single line from a Michelle Obama speech was seized upon by conservative partisans.

I will have to admit that when I heard Michelle Obama's comment I had to swallow hard. I was pretty amazed that anyone involved in politics at that level would say anything so controversial as an admission of not being proud to be American for even an instant, much less a period of decades.

I should add that I am not offended by the comment itself. I realize that it comes from someone young enough to not remember anything before the Regan administration, and the country has indeed been run into the ground by the reforms that administration brought. However, there are some things a candidate's wife just does not say if she wants her husband to be elected president, and this is one of them.

I wish this were not the case. Personally, I think that more honesty and a more open expression of what is on the minds of our presidential candidates would be a good thing. However, I've watched enough campaigns to know that comments like this can trigger a media hysteria that can bring down a candidate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have been and continue to be a very proud devotee of Hillary Clinton, who has shown herself to be courageous under fire, persistent, energetic, glass-half-full (and more) throughout months of assaults. She is a flawed individual, but then, so am I -- obviously many in the press do not see themselves that way considering their sacrosanct musings. You can almost see Russerts and Dowds preening into their coffecup reflections every morning.

When Clinton conecedes to The New Hope of America my one relief will be that for the next eight months I can put my feet up for the Coliseum fight and not feel so constantly bombarded on a personal level. Too bad it has taken some bedazzled Democrats so long to start to wake up. Hello? Anyone in there?

And presenting the next president of the United States ... John McCain.

What a collosal waste of the immense talent of Hillary Clinton. Some day take the time to really examine her record of votes, her championing of children and families, her outspoken criticism of abuses in China, her support for returning veterans in terms of money and care, ad infinitum, etc., etc.

Well, I am pleased now to head to the polls to vote for a stellar leader. Tomorrow, I'll grab a front-row seat, with my coffee, to watch the opening slugfests between Mr. Obama -- who will NOT experience a continued reign of unexamined adultation -- and McCain. Whew.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

For years GOP operatives have spread the lie about the "liberal media." When you have people like David Brooks and William Kristol writing for the New York Times, you know that it's not only Fox News and The Wall Street Journal that caters to reactionary causes, it's "the good old grey" itself.

The fact remains that our national media is corporate controlled, and corporations favor the GOP, no matter who is running for office, because Republicans favor corporations. Because there are more people with democratic instincts, the GOP has to use the media into brainwashing them to vote against their best interests. That's what our media hacks are paid to do.

Consider the latest ploy by Kathleen Parker, who complained recently that Obama's support among young people was an irrational phenomenon, running counter to the considered opinion of the "grown ups." Perhaps we do well to remember that Parker, in championing our invasion of Iraq, described young anti-war protesters in the same way. Who was being irrational then, Ms. Parker? Perhaps it's about time that we took the gloves off in dealing with the likes of Brooks, Kristol, Parker, Malkin, and the host of other JINOs (journalists in name only), and exposed them for what they are, miserable, lying whores for the corporate masters they serve.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm sorry, but that's my conclusion. Voting for one party or the other is voting for the continuation of the same agenda.

Yes, Obama sounds good. Yes, he is likable. But just because a commercial tickles your fancy, doesn't mean you should buy the product.

I know many feel differently. I understand and respect the reasons for that sentiment. But, were he elected, I predict Obama will perpetuate the same old same old. I don't see how it can be otherwise given our collective cultural aspirations and the deeply ingrained assumptions about who we are as a people.

The problems we face in the United States are systemic. No single election, no single individual, is going to make a difference. For that to occur, there must be a shift of conscience born of individual introspection about what is valuable, and that followed by a willingness to change one's habits.

In the wave of support propelling the Obama candidacy, I see wishful thinking and an unspoken and unacknowledged desire to have one's cake and eat it too. Once again, we as a nation are setting ourselves up for a let down.

For those who might be interested, here is the link to Gover Vidal's piece.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama got a free pass because the media believed Clinton was going to be the nominee. Now that Obama is looking like the frontrunner, he is the news and Clinton is old news. Who ever comes out of Texas with the win will be the frontrunner and the news. The really sad thing is that the media is in the entertainment business, therefore they love American idol issues. The real issues get buried; they are just to boring for TV. If the demons let this primary run past Texas and McCain has a free ride, they are likely to lose. Example: Who do you want to answer the midnight caller, a lightweight or a real war dog? Clinton or Obama loses. Universal health insurance is not universal health care; it is just another liberal spending bill. McCain wins. The demons need to make a deal and get the national campaign under way if they want to win the national election. So far none of the demon pundits have a clue what is happening with the repuks. If the media mouth conservatives, the supply sidewinder conservatives and the social conservatives are not voting for McCain. Who is voting for McCain? If the demons do not run a campaign to win that election they will lose.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lies have hurt our last 2 great men. Gore and Kerry and now they are attacking Obama with more lies every day. The press is playing along or maybe leading the charge. I pray that America will not be denied another great statesman because of lies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

me thinks no matter what they throw his way he will catch it put a nice spin on it and throw it right back at them
obamas got insight that those who heckle him will never have
in my opinion its not yes we can anymore
it should be yes we will
and since the energy is so strong,,the status quo is as it always has gonna start making shit up,,just to cause some mess,, 1 more thing they cant stand it that he and michelle actually have love,and look totally hot for each other,i think they make an awesome couple,,,
go barack,,keep on keepin on
heide
and when you are president
for earths sake
legalize all things hemp

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I conservatively estimate Hillary Clinton has suffered 5 billion dollars worth of negative advertising from the media. And, she's still standing tall and will probably win OHIO & TEXAS. Does that tell you something about her strength?

IF the stupid DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE (and I'm a 100% Democrat)hadn't stripped Florida of their delegates, she would be ahead.

Obama has had virtually no negative advertising from the media. It's just starting.

As I predicted weeks ago, the media has been trying to get Obama nominated...because Rove and others think Obama can be beaten...and Hillary Clinton cannot be beaten.

Obama is an attractive package, but I don't know him. I won't vote based on attraction, likeability, race, religion, or gender, or rock star quality. It is too important a job. I don’t want anyone in the job with their finger on our nuclear weapons that I don’t know and trust totally.

I’m very concerned about the Obama connection to Syrian born Antoin (Tony) Rezko, Obama’s longtime Chicago patron who helped him finance his political campaigns with over $150,000 in donations. Obama has donated $150,000 to charity in an attempt to clean his hands.

I’m very concerned about Rezko’s direct connection to Iraqi born Nadhmi Auchi, a billionaire who lives in Great Britain who had a direct connection to Saddam Hussein. Auchi laundered the UN-Oil-for-Food Money for Saddam Hussein through his bank in France. Auchi was found guilty for laundering the money and fined 2 million pounds by the French government.

Rezko went to trial on March 3 after his trial for fraud and extortion in Chicago was delayed one week. I wonder why?

Auchi admitted taking kickbacks from the French petroleum company TotalFinaElf in the 1990’s.

Auchi has transferred over $16 million dollars to Rezko.

The most recent transfer was for $3.5 million on May 23, 2005. Three weeks later, Rezko’s wife bought the $675,000 lot next door to Obama’s home, which Obama purchased on the same day for $1.3 Million. The seller of the home wouldn’t sell the home without the lot and the lot was only accessible through Obama’s property.

Obama has admitted he made a “bone-headed mistake” in allowing Rezko’s wife to buy the lot next door to his million dollar mansion the same day he bought his home.

The American press has been virtually silent. A couple of press releases is all you will find.

Look up “Obama Auchi Rezko” on the internet. Read the uk.times report.

Should Obama get the Nomination, this will be in the press ad nauseum for the next 9 months.

If Hillary wins Ohio and Texas, Hillary will be our next president.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The media has been giving this character a free ride for too long, and just because he's not all white.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

1996 Telecom "Deregulation" bill. If you people want a media that actually represents your interests, stop being a bunch of weenies and TURN OFF THAT GOD DAMN MOTHERFUCKING TELEVISION !!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who, all being multi-millionaires at least, are primarily interested in the core Republican concern: keeping millionaires from losing any money. Oh, this is also a core concern of the Democratic Party, but it's not the only one - they, unlike the Republicans, have to listen to the unions. Nader is also a millionaire, and I imagine he shares that same core concern.

Protecting wealth is, after all, one of the key jobs of the U.S. government. It was only as a result of Roosevelt's New Deal and the struggles of the unions against violent repression that we have such things as 40-hr work weeks, overtime pay, Social Security, and other basic services (public education systems, for example).

The elites in the U.S. don't like democracy, and over the past few decades we've seen the rise of a new American artistocracy. Their ideological vanguard is the neoconservatives and their wealth base is in fossil fuels, military weapons, pharmaceuticals, telecommunications, nuclear energy, computers, and so on. This is the group that the Republicans slavishly serve, and who the Clintons kissed up to for eight years.

In fact, Obama's lack of experience in that regard is the best argument for voting for him.

Look - politicians aren't heros. They should be viewed as managers, and should be evaluated on their managerial skills and their honesty and resistance to corruption and bribery. This is a theme that neither Democrats nor Republicans like to here, both of whom are apparently quite fond of the idea of ultimate executive power.

As far as this article, I never understand why authors of such pieces don't look to media owners as the source of the spin. The major shareholders in all major U.S. press outlets are all tied to the above interests - just look them up on Yahoo - TimeWarner (CNN), NewsCorp (FOX), General Electric (NBC), Disney (ABC), and Viacom-CBS. Look at the New York Times corporate board of directors (they share a director with the Carlyle Group - please!).

Henry Kissinger is an evil old toad, but he is known to speak the truth now and again, as when he said "I only watch the media to see what is being fed to the American people."

Remember - regardless of who is elected as President (or is that selected?) , the real political actions that will shape the future happen AFTER the election - when the lobbyists roll in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If bad actor contributors are a problem then Hillary has plenty to worry about. One of her's is in prison right now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

watch out for heavy doses of neurolinguistic programming, and just plain old racism. You are a brainwashed cult follower if you passionately support a person of color but "normal" or "reasonable" if you support a business as usual conservative white guy. talk about white privilege.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

People of America with all due respect just a few years ago many of you listened, and took in all that the media sent over the airwaves and you finished up wrongfully attacking Iraq soley based on lies and spin.
Please take a little time and try and reason for yourselves as to who you will eventually endorse as the next leader of your great country will be.Whoever is the chosen one will have the most difficult and problematic administration to rectify after the last incumbent of that office.
Remember, the Bush and Clinton families have controlled the US for over a decade.
A woman or a coloured man?
Whoever is elected will be the first of their genre. Think hard and long I urge you.
The world awaits.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The reason Obama has been getting such bad press recently is that the Repblicans, who for months bashed Hillary and praised Obama, have suddenly awakened to the possibility that Obama might actually win the nomination. Obama, with his relatively clean record would be much more difficult to attack than would Hillary. The Republicans, and, unfortunately, the Clinton people, are both ganging up on Obama because they have a common goal, and that goal is to see a McCain-Hillary race for the White House. The Republicans think they can beat Hillary. And even if they cannot, they can be pretty certain that Hillary is not going to do anything radical, like get out of Irag or stop nation building, two Bush policies that make us the most hated country in the world. With Hillary it will be politics as usual. And that's okay with the establishment. Change frightens them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This guy has had a free pass all along. The two most important people in his life - his wife and his pastor - are Black nationalists and he has hateful "gay cure" preachers on his team. It's time to stop drinking the Kool-Aid and start really looking at what this guy actually is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Out there in plain sight is the ongoing demise of our once free press. As usual, one can't point to a single reason for this, or even explain it in several sentences. The SYMPTOMS are there for all (who are actually CURIOUS), however.1. Press considolation by a few neocons is not just a random event; it's deliberate, and most likely in violation of anti-trust laws.2. The disintegration of our public education system is, in my estimation, also deliberate. This has led to a very large body of people who are ignorant, incurious, easily led down the garden path, and above all, HAPPY WITH THE SITUATION to the point of obnoxious smugness.3. Stacking of the deck in favor of the neocons. Is there anyone out there who hasn't seen the accumulation of absolute power by our presedential impersonator? The Judicial segment and our moribund "congress" are safely in the pocket of the bush crime family to do with as they please. Does anyone out there seriously doubt that this regime would attack Iran, and with nukes if desired, WITH OR WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF "CONGRESS" or our people? Who's there to stop them or bring justice down upon them? A free press would expose the bushies as the evil bastards they are and they wouldn't have gotten away with half the crap they've pulled since Jan 20th, 2001. This date may well be the date cited as the date our democratic experiment began to unravel, and with tragic consequences, worldwide.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...of the GOP strategy loop. The GOP MSM will soon go back to the love affair with Obama. Just as soon as today's results are in, Hillary wins, and is clearly still in the race, right up to the convention.

Then, as much as I (and others) have exposed their strategy at shamelessly and unexplicably pushing their "can't-win candidate", the GOP and Rove will need to go back to loving Obama and hating Hillary.

ASAP. And they will.

So don't worry. It's just a first quarrel. Honeymoon's not over yet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Folks just don't get it. None of the democratic candidates got it. Republicans are missing the point. The media, rather than working hard and getting to a story, are continuing to rely on others to produce their background material and they're missing the point. They just don't get it. Yes We Can!

Those of us who support Barack and the thousands joining us everyday, yes the delusional Obamamaniacs or whatever else anyone wants to call us, support Barack not only for his unparalleled delivery, but for the substance of his ideas, the depth of his policies and the quality of his character, and we're not listening. Yes We Can! Yes We Can!

Fight that. Condemn that. But "they" are going to have to come up with something new, something of substance, possibly a better idea, a better policy, a better delivery, as fear and smear aren't working. Yes We Can! Yes We Can! Yes We Can!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Even the NY Times, whose editorial board had 'officially' endorsed Clinton, ran only articles favorable to Obama, was late to report anything on Obama's NAFTA doubletalk, and what they finally reported does not give the full story and its far-reaching implications. It is time this changes.

Concerning the NAFTA incident, I think it is very serious and should not be dismissed lightly. The incident with the Canadian officials, in which one of Obama's advisors is said to have described Obama's NAFTA position as just campaign rhetoric is very significant to voters who have been affected adversely by NAFTA. This incident has important significance to all voters, however, as it raises questions concerning Obama's credibility.

Let us suppose for the sake of argument that the advisor -- who was a U. of Chicago professor and Obama's chief economic advisor -- did not know what Obama's NAFTA position really was, or that the Canadian officials with whom he spoke simply misunderstood what he was saying. Obama's response when news of the conversation broke out was to deny that the conversation happened. Subsequently, when the memorandum documenting the conversation surfaced, he claimed that that was the information he had at the time of his denial.

Let us consider this. Is it believable that Obama did not communicate with the person at the heart of the controversy when it erupted? Or is it believable that the advisor, who honest enough to neither confirm nor deny the conversation when questioned by the press (possibly because he was aware of the consequences of a cover up), would lie to his boss? I don't think so. Obama, possibly unaware of the practice of diplomatic personnel to document such exchanges, took the gamble that he would not be found out and lied.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is what the media should be focused on. Why are they ignoring the Racist attack on Obama. This is what HATEWATCH is reporting.....

Racist Attacks on Obama Growing More Heated
Posted in Klan, White Supremacist, Hate Groups by Mark Potok on February 20, 2008


With the selection of Barack Obama as the first black Democratic nominee for president seeming more possible by the day, racists and white supremacists are posting increasingly ugly and even threatening remarks on the Internet.

“OBAMA WILL DIE, KKK FOREVER,” concludes a Feb. 15 post by “Rodney” to a blog run by a person identified only as Strider333. Above that signoff, Rodney wrote: “The KKK or someone WILL assassinate Obama! If we get a N--ger President all you N--GER’s [sic] will think you’ve won and that the WHITE people will have to bow to you[.] F--K THAT.”

On traditional white supremacist and neo-Nazi sites (for instance, here and here), there are lengthy discussion threads about what would happen if Obama were elected president. Dozens of those posts are derogatory and employ all kinds of racist slurs. Others speculate that such an Obama victory would kick off a race war between whites and blacks. And some even raise the possibility that he could be assassinated. But talk like that is rare and extremely careful — probable evidence that the “white nationalists” who inhabit these sites are deeply concerned that their comments are being monitored by law enforcement for any criminal threat relating to the presidential race. In fact, Obama reportedly received federal Secret Service protection unusually early in the campaign season because of concerns about a racially motivated attack.

The most heated anti-Obama talk appears to be on Internet sites that allow people to post messages anonymously. One such site, JD Underground, is a list ostensibly devoted to lawyers, although further details were not available. It has carried a particularly venomous thread, entitled “N--ger President,” that has stretched from January into this month.

“I’m hoping someone will do his public duty of putting a bullet through Obama’s head,” said a poster identified as “Kill Da N--ga.” Another poster suggests “bring[ing] back lynchings” and concludes with a warning: “LOOK OUT N--GER. THE KLAN IS GETTING BIGGER!!!!!!” And a third, using the screen name “amerikkkan,” says only, “The deep south is making plans.”

Now where in hell is the media on this?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

... it's American media... which portrays itself, and thus America, as a deeply hate filled, racist, fascist, war culture bent on killing everyone on Earth to keep McDonald's in business... in India.

The giant gap between what Americans are and think and what the media insists Americans feel should be a sign to you all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

too bad the corporate media did not take this approach when it came to the current president,instead the media became the waterboy for president bush and his administration.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There are way too many people on this thread who need to have everything told to them rather than doing the work of researching a candidates' background. It's clear that they are so stupid as to buy into every piece of negative information no matter how often refuted. They are the very reason we've been stuck with conservative talk-radio and television for so long, because those pundits don't demand deep thought and rational discussion, but blind obdience and name-calling. You have a brain--it would be nice if you would actually USE it.

If you want to know about Obama's positions on issues, it's really simple: GO TO HIS FREAKING WEBSITE! Everything that you've ever wanted to know is right there in black and white and has been attributed to the source. I think it's funny when the media tries to go after him on some position because they're always wrong. Of course they're going to go after him now, but it's going to be interesting to see what nonsense they can come up with.

His wife Michelle's comments on being a proud American were dead-on and for people to make more out of it proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the media really doesn't have anything damaging on Obama. Frankly, I agree with her and still do. The dude who claimed to have had sex with him has been utterly refuted after having failed a polygraph test TWICE. The Louis Farrakhan thing--just because one attends a church doesn't necessarily mean they give up freedom of thought. For some blacks, who have long since moved past the racist rhetoric of Farrakhan (whom by the way has apologized over and over for his statements), the man has been at the forefront of positive social change in some communities. Even Jack Kemp, a conservative, lauded the Million Man March as an indicator of positive activism amongst the black community--and it was PEACEFUL too.

Politics is a dirty game and Obama understands that better than we think he does. The man wants to bring a new tenor to the process, and I for one am willing to give him a chance since his record speaks volumes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am amazed that the voters here or everywhere were the media any indication, are so fickle to ooh and ahh at the negatives being thrown out lately at Obama; especially Hillaryʻs inuendos and attacks.
Why doesnt Barack start slinging back?
Hill has so much baggage, maybe he should sling back "in kind" and worse, now that she is starting to slow him down.
He has known negativity is less desirable, but if he is going to get kicked to the curb, why not? Thereʻs very few with more shady dealings and downright subverting the law than the Clintons.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When Jefferson philosophized about a well-informed population being democracy’s bottom line, he no doubt meant something a damned sight different from what our decidedly misinformed population is being fed by the so-called journalists of our mainline media. Their outright lies, their distortions, their half truths, their bald partisanship in the service of the rich, the powerful, the greedy, the reactionary, indeed their very patrons, owners of those mainline media, are eroding what can best be described as what was once a work in progress. Each of these hate-infused and infusing wordmongers is no less than a traitor to this work in progress, this evolving democracy of ours, destroying it from within, like a cancer, by depriving its bottom line of what it needs to remain viable; namely, the truth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Liberals need to imitate Right-Wingers when it comes to the mainstream media.

Quite your goddamn whining. Whiners are losers.

Just go crazy every time some story is in the press that is unfavorable and potentially damaging to your side. Flood them with emails and letters to the editors. Scream to the top of your lungs how the media is, in the case of Obama, racist and cowed by the hateful political Right. Repeat ad nauseam the media is just out to get your candidate and act as if your oblivious to what they're saying anyway.

Instead of whining fight back harder than ever. They are going to try and bring the Democrat nominee down anyway they can, and you know it. Don't you be surprised by any of it.

If your just a regular person in your private life don't let anyone around you get away with spreading Republican propaganda and lies. Instead, spread as much dirt as you can about their loser candidate. What's great for us is we don't have to make anything up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Havent you ever stopped to wonder why is it that this election cycle TPTB ("The powers that be") are giving both a woman and a black man a shot at the presidency? It's because they know that the next four years are going to be the worst this nation has seen since the great depression. And whichever one wins is going to be blamed for it. If Obama wins, then we're looking at a huge increase in racially motivated crimes. If Hillary wins, it will usher in a worldwide attack on feminism.

There is NO political difference between these two candidates. They will accomplish nothing except perhaps creating more Victim Disarmament Zones and carrying out eugenics programs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

one party + two names= fascism

go back to sleep america, its to late to do anything. while you listen to the pundits yammer on, the plan has already been implemented. the corporations are running the show. americans are more worried about the three "G's" (guns,god and gays) than they are about the constitution. go back to sleep and when you wake up, go shopping at walmart

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE..TO THE FLAG..OF THE UNITED STATES OF HALLIBURTON..AND TO THE REPUBLICAN..FOR WHICH HE PROFITS..ONE CORPORATION..UNDER "DOD"..INVINCIBLE..W/ LIBERTY OIL..A BLOODY IRAQ..AND A CORPORATE FASCIST WAR MACHINE..4 ALL!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

of this election crap, suddenly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Finally, the press is going to scrutinize Obama so people can really see what he is all about. I'm not suggesting there are any problems with him but he deserves NO LESS scrutiny than Hillary has received. Every thing she says, does or thinks, the press has to analyze, critique and criticize. Before we go and make a decision about who our nominee is, lets FINALLY start looking at the REAL Obama. I just hope it's not too late.
Remember how the press gave GW a pass because he was such a likeable guy and the uniter not the divider???? Look what we got because so many bought into the press....they now realize what a terrible mistake they made. Let's not repeat it!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

is good to hear. You are right. And I know that you are right because yesterday, no less than premier Republican online rag Newsmax, ran an article on "Why the GOP Loves Obama" that made most of the points you mention. I put the article on line, on the other Alternet anti-Hillary site. It's in three parts and it starts "The MSM is Taking Direction From Karl Rove..."

I'm bringing the original Newsmax article to the GOP (scuse me, DEM) caucus tonight. Probably no chance now for the Dems to avoid a real major train-wreck. But I'll sleep better tonight knowing that I tried. You can sleep even better than me, because you had the good sense to see through the media adulation of Barack, to see what the real point of it all is, a most Rove-ian "divide and conquer".

To you (and you alone) I suggest: go subscribe as I did to a Republican rag called Newsmax. I like to keep a direct eye on the enemy and there's no better piece of trash than Newsmax. You'll be surprised how places like Alternet and Huffington Post and America's Future--who you'd think would know better--uncritically follow the reasoning of America's worst enemies of all time, and bash the one leader they have who had the ghost of a chance to win in November against McCain. Most of their ranting and raving, could have been come straight out of Newsmax--and of course now, they're finding out they've been led down the garden path, too late for it to do any good now, cause the primaries are upon us--at least, here in TX--tonight. We had such a great chance.

Now, seems like all that's over. Once more, congratulations to you for--without any props such as I had--seeing the media spin here on Alternet et al, like it is.

See--before reading the Newsmax article, I too had switched my allegiance from Hillary to Barack. Thank God I didn't post any of my feelings then online, because according to Newsmax I would have been--like most Dems posting here--really publicly backing the wrong, GOP-picked horse. And I'd hate to think of how I'd be sleeping tonight, if I hadn't read that article.

Well--this'll make at least two of us voting for Hillary tonight!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Whatever the media is doing or not doing to Obama is nothing compared to what the Republican swiftboat/character assassination squad has in store for him. If they can't find any real dirt, they'll invent some.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

and so, now the media attacks obama, what that women said about his parents seemed to me, off beat, tacky racist. BUT..... this may be good for my gal, "mizz" hillary[ " MS." not " Mrs." new york times! thank you!] , whom I am soon to get back to the calling tonight as volunteer donw in that " whole 'nother country" called texas. personally, I feel that, as a lesbian, obama and hillary seem to have the same positions on everything, except the gay marriage deal; one in which all the fundy- christian churches and right wing moslems alike- all ought to be told " y'all don't like it, go the hell to Iran and live in y'all's religious, hate fueled bliss."
BUT..... obama seriously lacks the experience to run this country , I feel; something which hillary has more of. honestly, I do feel that it is high time for BILL to " step out of the MS's way and let THE MS. RUN THE SHOW! [ his wife whom he is lucky to be still have after the monica BJ deal!LOL :D ] if obama wins this nomination, I will, no doubt , vote for him; as I love what they are saying about him being " feminine"; he is just that inside the man's body. and john mc bush???? the " man's man" I just hope that his grand-daughters never get either raped , or even pregnant- as then they will have their " man's man" of a father to thank for them having to resort back to the "good ol' coat hanger method"[ NARAL.org- see " john mc jerk" R and proud of it] well back to calling for the MS. *cher:)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am absolutely appalled, but sadly not surprised by the ignorant comments made by many of the posters here accusing Obama of being some kind of GOP operative or that he's all style and no substance. The man's record speaks volumes--all he asks that you do is to become actively engaged in the political process by finding out what he stands for, rather than remaining passive and getting your news from Faux News or The Drudge Report. Unlike so many in here, Obama was actually paying attention in history class to Thomas Jefferson's call for an educated populace to keep checks and balances with our leaders. Obama's running a different kind of campaign, and it's one that we've never seen before. Frankly, it's refreshing not to have to be subjected to endless rounds of character assassination. No wonder the GOP wackos are losing sleep--how can they fight against so much positivity? Not to mention, they've exhausted all their capital by going after his middle name and his church. We've heard it all before. Swiftboating him would only make him a bigger hero to many who remember what happened to John Kerry.

I've come to the conclusion that for many Americans, including some of my so-called 'liberal' bretheren, they're perfectly happy living in the mess that we're in and that any attempts by a well-meaning citizen to change things for the better have been met by either cynicism or outright hostility. No wonder so many here are salivating at the idea of the Re"puke"lican spin machine going after Obama, his wife and perhaps even his little girls. They like wallowing in misery; it gives them something to blog about.

Is it any surprise that other countries have no respect for us whatsoever when it seems that few citizens here are willing to think for themselves? We truly are our own worst enemies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama and Hillary are quite the same on many positions, they both want a national health care system in some form or another, both say they would "re-negotiate" parts of NAFTA, and both favor not keeping tax breaks for the rich. Therefore, it comes down to who has more "charisma" with the voters, and who the voters trust more. Hillary will have a hard time distancing herself from the "Washington Insider" view that many Americans have of her. Yes, she has a lot of experience, but is that good or bad and is more experience just a sign of being potentially more corrupted by the lobbyists and fatcats? Obama has the advantage that he seems "hipper" and he has a bit more charisma with the younger crowd. In this respect, Obama has a bit of an advantage. Now,
what will win the election? I think its a lot more ultimately about style then substance. McCain is going to be portrayed as the "war hero," versus probably Obama's "new guard" kind of image. If it were McCain versus Hillary, I think she is going to have to re-tool her image to go against him. In this respect, I think Obama already has the advantage with his current image.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How many racist white voters do you think exist for every young black voter in America today?

1? 5? 10? How about 25? 50? Maybe 75? 100? Even higher?

How many would it take to utterly destroy Obama against McCain?

TWO would do it. Now, how many racist older white and Latino people do you know who would never, under any circumstances, vote for a black candidate?

Don't you think that Karl Rove and the GOP-owned mainstream media know all this? Don't you think they've figured this all out, even if ObamaNation hasn't?

Do the math, folks. Dr. King's dream is at least eight years away, if we're LUCKY.

Am I glad about that? Hell no.

But I do NOT WANT INSANE JOHN MCCAIN ANYWHERE NEAR THE OVAL OFFICE.

Neither should you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There's bad joojoo going on in this thread..

Pro Hillary posts are rated up and pro Obama posts down.

I'm voting for McCain should Obama fail to be nominated.

Don't be prodded by whack jobs. (read: rate this fuckos)

Who the hell cares who gets scrutinised however deeply.. that's the gig.. take it or leave. Or, as has been suggested, write something. (as well as a suggestion to turn off your FUCKING TELEVISION! I heartily recommend taking this into consideration)

My opinion is Obama is earning it and Clinton is riding it.

Ride's over. Get out. Now, while there still is some hope. The split will occur otherwise and THAT is what the red team is counting on now that Clinton's fate has been grayed.

See? Everyone has an opinion. Speaking of; If I have to friggin rely on Ohio's opinion one more time to decide political fate for an entire country I'll... I'll.. well, I'll complain about it. Yeah.

\r

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One could argue that during the George W. Bush campaigns we saw a Bushmania, Bushophilia, cult-like frenzy of followers - all those delusional Bushies (who are now disillusioned).

Can Obama unite the country? Does the country WANT to be united, or are we too addicted to the sensational info-tainment whores?

It seems the electorate proves over, and over again, that we can't think beyond the drivel of manufactured stories that are regurgitated by wind-up news readers.

Heaven help us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just WHO all these media attacks are created for. Who watches this bullshit, who is paying attention to it at all? Who believes it to be true to any degree. YOU. THEM. WE. US. The only reason it is done at all is because people are too fucking stupid to not pay attention to it. And on and on it goes. Turn off the TV.

http://www.addictedtoaggravation.com/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

March 5th, 2008 9:28 am ET
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Someone in the news media should investigate the suspicious timing of a Canadian official's disclosure of a preemptive 'conversation' with an Obama campaign economic advisor about NAFTA … on the eve of a primary vote in Texas and Ohio … not leaving enough time for all the details to emerge.

Could this be a favor called in by the Clinton Clan?

In politics allegations don't have to be true to have an effect, as we've learned from those sly republican tacticians.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Attacking presidential candidates is not a recent phenomenon; we know that. But what's more revealing is the scope and depth some journalists and opposing candidates will say to get elected or to make points with their readers (listeners).
There have been plenty of examples of brass knuckles-type fights (disguised as debates) in previous campaigns-Reagan vs. Carter, Clinton vs. Bush 41, etc. And what has been the result? People will say anything outside their own voice of reason and logic to become president.
Now it's quite troubling that Obama will match his rival in tough talk when he really doesn't have to subscribe to it. Neither the previously eliminated Democratic candidates needed brass knuckles to make a point.
Eloquence and fair play obviously will be missing from future stops, and the way we in the media act like hyenas after a wildebeest kill only exacerbate the dilemma.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I just got this in my e-mail this morning. It is one of those messages forwarded and forwarded again, and urging me to send a copy to everyone on my mailing list. If he gets the nomination, I'm sure this kind of stuff will begin flying all over the internet. Here is the text:

Subject: Re: Fw: Fw: President Obama

Are there ANY cities with a black mayor that are doing well?

Any??? Think of our entire country being like Memphis TN, Gary IN, New Orleans LA, etc. etc.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It is really such a testament to the biggoted and hysterical character of white Americans that his name or the idea that he could be a Muslim is viewd as slander.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Democrats have made your vote count--if they were like the Republicans, winner take all, the Democratic race would most likely have a clear winner by now. But because we are doing it all on percentages of wins, it takes longer and the fight will get more bitter.

Obama's campaign called Hillary a monster--wtf? It's not a one sided smear by any stretch of the imagination.

Obama supporters--there are those of us in the Democratic party who are just as excited about Hillary as you are about Obama. I don't trust the guy and won't vote for him if he wins the nomination, the same way you won't vote for her. So if McCain gets into the white house Obama will be to blame as well.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]