Connecting You to Your Community
Lodi, California •

Indexes

November 2nd, 2009
November 8th, 2009
November 7th, 2009
November 6th, 2009
November 5th, 2009
November 4th, 2009
November 3rd, 2009
November 2nd, 2009
ADVERTISEMENT

Is Obama qualified to be president?


Saturday, March 22, 2008 6:27 AM PDT

I was extremely disappointed in Democratic candidate Obama's response to the various comments he has labeled as "racist."

I thought someone seeking the presidency of the United States would have risen above these comments. If anything, I now question whether he is qualified or ready to be president.

Roger Kern
Lodi

Reader Feedback

Leonard wrote on Mar 30, 2008 1:45 PM:

" There I was sitting at Church this morning and my ears started burning.

At the time, I wondered why. Now, I guess I know.

I suppose that I should be honored that Brian seems to care so much about what I do and how I do it.
"

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 12:55 PM:

" Something that has not been discussed here is Obama's nickname in high school. Evidently he was known as 'Barry O'Bomber' referring to his impressive jump shot in basketball.

This is the kind of information that should be out there to give us better insight as to who he is. My nickname at the institution where I was raised was simple - 'Pig.' I think I'd rather be remembered as O'Bomber, although the name was attached because of my 'slightly' pug nose.

Obama was evidently an outstanding student. I just thought I'd throw that out there. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 12:37 PM:

" Brian - since you've gone back that far in your research of my stand on issues, I would expect then that you have realized that I am not some sort of puppet 'handled' by others.

There are many issues on which my stand is absolutely firm, rigid even. Yet, I am always open to listening to others' opinions, even (especially) when they are as firm in their convictions as I. When I do find an opening permitting me to state my case in opposition, I seize upon it; although I do so with fervor and respect. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 12:25 PM:

" I guess Leonard's influenced me more than I realize. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 12:23 PM:

" girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 11:54 AM:

" voter wrote, 'this garbage is part of the FOX NEWS campaign to paint Obama as a "scary black man" in the eyes of its mostly undereducated, white WalMart-Republican audience.'

This is patently absurd. What, we're not supposed to investigate the integrity and background of ALL those desiring to become the President? Doing so labels one (individual, group, news outlet, etc.) as 'racist'?

The rest of your blogg couldn't fit with this comment of mine. It is my sentiments exactly. Let's begin here on this note. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 12:20 PM:

" Brian wrote, 'In other words, your'e (sic) sticking with the masses that disagree with me. Some people would call that peer pressure.
That said, I'll give it a rest.

You do agree that Obama has too many skeletons in his closet? Or have you changed your position on that too out of peer pressure?'

Now just why would I ever consider taking you seriously? This is exactly what I've been trying to get through to you on. You ask what appears to be a logical question; and then immediately snipe me with a silly jibe. Again, exactly why are you here? "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 12:16 PM:

" Girard74 wrote; What you want is something I cannot provide: agreement with you on virtually everything of which you disagree with others on this blog.

In other words, your'e sticking with the masses that disagree with me. Some people would call that peer pressure.
That said, I'll give it a rest.

You do agree that Obama has too many skeletons in his closet? Or have you changed your position on that too out of peer pressure?
"

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 12:05 PM:

" I wrote on Mar 30, 2008 11:53 AM:

'Brian - your methodology in your discourse encourages me from 'entertaining your thoughts.'

That should read '...discourages' me from 'entertaining your thoughts.' "

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 11:56 AM:

" Brian stated, 'How many times has he grandstanded only to be ignored by most. You sir, are a hypocrite (sic).'

Oh no!! Not the hypocrisy label!! I really thought there couldn't possibly be TWO of these on the same blog-block. The truth is slowly emerging; it won't be long now!!

H5! "

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 11:53 AM:

" Brian - your methodology in your discourse encourages me from 'entertaining your thoughts.'

While asking what might appear to be a logical question, you lace it with comments such as, 'I only say this because of your persistence to proove (sic) me wrong and to keep in good graces with the fray here.'

What you want is something I cannot provide: agreement with you on virtually everything of which you disagree with others on this blog.

Not only is your brand of 'debate' non-productive, it simply isn't pleasurable for me. And I enjoy debating - it is under normal circumstances, fun. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 11:27 AM:

" Girard74 Wrote:In debate, there's not much respect for those who support their contentions on passion alone.

Boy you described Leonard here to the T.

How many times has he grandstanded only to be ignored by most. You sir, are a hipocrite. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 11:21 AM:

" G74, Ok you're not interested in entertaining my thoughts.

But you can't proove me wrong. You question my sources just like Leonard.

Yet you expect me to continue to provide
sources even though they will be met with pessimism. Am I to conclude that there isn't any source you will agree with? You're just like Leonard. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 11:14 AM:

" Liberal ideology is ,in essence:

Anything that is older than yesterday is
outmoded.

Liberals consider it an inconvenience
to remember what brought them to this point in time. Hence, those that forget their history are doomed to repeat it. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 11:12 AM:

" Brian wrote, 'Girard74, instead of tearing me down perhaps you can build me up.'

What exactly do you think I have been doing? By 'build[ing] [you] up,' do you mean that I should simply nod my head and agree with everything you state; that YOUR enemies should be MY enemies; that I should change my method of debate to one that has no basis in fact or truth? Is this how you want me to 'build you up?'

Sorry fella, can't do that; not for YOU, not for NO ONE. (Double negative intended simply because your whole argument is silly.) "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 11:03 AM:

" Girard74, So you agree that these presidents gave us outmoded ideologies?

I only say this because of your persistence to proove me wrong and to keep in good graces with the fray here. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:57 AM:

" Girard74, instead of tearing me down perhaps you can build me up. You're so intent on prooving me wrong. For what?
Because you're a liberal? "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:55 AM:

" Like I advised you a short time ago - learn to pick your fights carefully. Anyone who engages in battle knowing full well that they cannot possibly win is foolish, to say the least. "

It seems to me you're too concerned about me. I'm appalled that you would think that I am engaging in a fight I cannot win. I have only just begun.
Are YOU afraid you might learn something from someone you feel superior to? Go away, you're getting on my nerves. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:54 AM:

" Brian referred to 'Wikipedia.'

You should know, Brian, that Wikipedia isn't all that reliable. Much of the information there is from folks like us who simply send them our definitions of different things and they somehow make it to the website. I'm not sure what their vetting system is; but I wouldn't rely solely on that as my reference base. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:50 AM:

" An investigation of Wikipedia and the term Conservatism will reveal a liberal’s view of conservatism; that it has no ideology, but that it is only tied inflexibly to outmoded ideologies of the past. I suppose that is accurate if you believe Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison, Adams, Franklin, and others, gave us the outmoded ideologies of freedom of speech, religion, and the tumultuous inalienable rights that no man or government can claim authority over.

Hense my suspicion that my conservatism
is viewed here from a liberals point of view. Jefferson, Hamilton, and the others are turning over in their graves. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:48 AM:

" Brian wrote, 'You are, in essence, pulling a Leonard as an attempt to prop yourself up and distract us from your shortcomings.'

What, you think I care what you think of me? There are those here whose opinions of me do, in fact, matter to me. This is only because over the course of time we've been able to discuss, argue, rant, rave and scream at each other - and then 'walk away' with our self-respect intact as well as a little more respect for our worthy opponents.

This is why I enjoy debating so much; exactly why are you here? "

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:43 AM:

" Brian stated, 'I've seen this many times that when I try to insert some conservatism into a blog (sic) the liberals come out of the woodwork protesting "How Dare You"' (sic)

If you don't think that goes both ways, then you are truly deluded.

Like I advised you a short time ago - learn to pick your fights carefully. Anyone who engages in battle knowing full well that they cannot possibly win is foolish, to say the least. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:39 AM:

" Voter: The majority of the respected universities here are left leaning.
You can deny this all you want but facts are facts.

I did check the source. Tell me something else I already know. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:33 AM:

" Given I share the sentiments of many others that conservatism and wisdom walk hand in hand much more often than liberalism and wisdom I have to conclude
that this blogg is populated by more liberals than conservatives.

I've seen this many times that when I try to insert some conservatism into a blogg the liberals come out of the woodwork protesting "How Dare You"

Cogito and I are amongst the minority here. I'm dubious Girard and Co. have the slightest idea what conservatism really is. "

voter wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:29 AM:

" Brian writes, "SOUNDS like a left leaning site."

But you wouldn't know one way or the other, Brian, because you didn't check it out, like the others here would if they suspected its objectivity. The site was reporting on a peer reviewed study conducted over 30 years by a respected university. Girard is right--you are not marginalized for you opinions, but for the manner in which you conduct yourself. You arrogantly throw out sensational invective and then expect us to do the leg work to "prove" your ridiculous points. Come back when you learn some manners.

H-5 "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:25 AM:

" Girard74, shall we presume that you are officially now one of Leonard's cronies?

I thought you were of sound mind. I was wrong.

Have a nice day:) "

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:13 AM:

" It's official now - Brian = 'He who shall not be named.'

H5! "

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:11 AM:

" Brian - I think you're on the wrong web-site. The whiners, moaners and groaners site is elsewhere; I'll leave it up to you to find it.

Off you go now; that's a good little boy. No, you can't play with the big boys here - you'll get hurt. Some day, maybe when you're 50, you'll be capable of contributing something of value. Until then, Sesame Street beckons. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:08 AM:

" I just can't wait to hear what RF has to say about the garbage Leonard has served up again and how Girard74 has took the bait. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:06 AM:

" And the butt kissing continues. Smooch smooch smooch. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:01 AM:

" Girard74, It seems to me Leonard has no problem with your moderating because you are kissing his butt.

Real Facts wouldn't kiss Leonard's butt.
And so, what does Leonard do? He marginalizes him. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:00 AM:

" Brian - a little unsolicited advice. Try not to worry about being wrong. Most of us hate it when we're caught on an error that could have been avoided had we conducted just a modicum of research. We end up cursing ourselves. And while that gives our opponents their 'moment,' if we admit the error in a respectful manner, two things happen - the issue is resolved and you may very well have earned a bit of respect from your opponent. That 'bit,' as you will soon realize, goes a long way in your furthering your stand on other issues. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 9:58 AM:

" Girard74 wrote:What you consider 'stupid,' Leonard does not. This is the nature of 'opinion.' You need to pick your fights more carefully. Learn about the person you intend to argue with; there will be certain issues that are simply not debatable - try and understand that. "

This just goes to show how little you know about me too. I am much more capable of discerning things then you give me credit for. You are, in essence, pulling a Leonard as an attempt to prop yourself up and distract us from your shortcomings.

Can we expect some grandstanding from you too? "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 9:52 AM:

" voter wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:50 PM:

" The article in LiveScience says "The surveys assessed attitudes on politics, economics, race, gender, religion and sexuality issues. In some cases, such as racial issues and questions of civil liberties for communists, the researchers measured a greater change toward liberalism in older people than in younger people."

It would seem that more is at play here than irresponsible savings for retirement. "

Sounds like a left leaning site. Perhaps a little biased. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 9:52 AM:

" Brian wrote, 'His latest rant is that since Worldnetdaily.com has been filtered by the military for a very stupid reason he doesn't consider it a reputable site even though overall the military as whole, minus the jackoff who decided to filter it, considers it a wealth of good news reporting. WND is a pro-troop site.'

What you consider 'stupid,' Leonard does not. This is the nature of 'opinion.' You need to pick your fights more carefully. Learn about the person you intend to argue with; there will be certain issues that are simply not debatable - try and understand that. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 9:49 AM:

" Brian wrote, 'Of course Leonard doesn't like Prager so he'll attempt to dismiss anything he says as hogwash and try to marginalize me as he always does.'

Leonard, like most of us here, is very opinionated. What you view as 'marginalizing' you is actually an attempt to have you 'back up' that which you so fervently believe.

In debate, there's not much respect for those who support their contentions on passion alone. There needs to be some sort of believable premise underlying the statements put forth; otherwise, it just turns into a brawl. Like I said before, you gotta have thicker skin. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 9:45 AM:

" Girard, You have no idea how far Leonard will go to marginalize someone.

His latest rant is that since Worldnetdaily.com has been filtered by the military for a very stupid reason
he doesn't consider it a reputable site even though overall the military as whole, minus the jackoff who decided to filter it, considers it a wealth of good news reporting. WND is a pro-troop site. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 9:40 AM:

" Girard74, Are you a fan of Dennis Prager? He has written many columns on conservatism and talks about it daily on his radio show.

I'll look up some of his columns that have facts to back this up.

Of course Leonard doesn't like Prager so he'll attempt to dismiss anything he says as hogwash and try to marginalize me as he always does. "

Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 9:35 AM:

" Brian wrote on Mar 30, 2008 9:27 AM:

" Cogito wrote on Mar 29, 2008 11:40 PM:

" Since Lincoln, the last President elected from a new party, we have had twice as many Republican Presidents as Democrats. So it's pretty obvious, America is twice as likely to agree with Republican idealism, or twice as likely to reject what Democrats stand for. Take your pick.

-This proves my point that there is more wisdom in conservatism than liberalism.

AND THIS IS JUST THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG "

girard74 wrote on Mar 30, 2008 8:19 AM:

" Brian wrote, 'So you and your cronies can pick it apart. It's not so outlandish that you can't find these studies for yourself.'

Tell me you're not this ignorant. You're the one who put forth what you believe to be 'fact' with no supporting evidence. When we are so unreasonable as to ask you where you got your 'statistics,' you actually have the gall to whine about us.

So, here's my analysis. You presented your 'opinion,' based on nothing but your arrogance attempting to pass it off as fact. As such, not only is your premise dismissed you are as well. (IMHO) "

voter wrote on Mar 30, 2008 8:10 AM:

" No doubt in my mind, C., that you speak the truth. But I did read a big part of that study and they didn't ask how people vote, so much as what their attitudes are towards race relations, sex, civil rights, etc.--and findings pointed towards all growing more liberal as we age. It's true of me, and I'll bet you too. "

Cogito wrote on Mar 29, 2008 10:23 PM:

" Voter, have you ever read the AARPs magazine around election time? First of all, they give a lot of money to Democrat candidates. But they use unfounded scare tactics, like the big bad Republicans are going to take everything away from you if they run the country. Check it out sometime. My mother-in-law has had over 300K in govt. paid for medical bills in the last 4 years. Could you imagine the financial ruin that could impose on the elderly? The left plays on that fear to the hilt! By the way, she's a Republican despite the AARP. "

Cogito wrote on Mar 29, 2008 10:09 PM:

" Voter, thanks for the laugh. I think that there are enough programs currently to take care of our elderly. I don't want our older citizens to go without food or shelter. But we can't expect our younger citizens to properly plan for their retirement if we keep taking more and more out of their paychecks in taxes for more and more social programs. Most of our politicians are very wealthy and are out of touch on what it's like to live on normal wages and plan for retirement. It takes 100K to make it today. "

voter wrote on Mar 29, 2008 10:01 PM:

" My take on the survey is that as people age, they often realize that the world is not so black and white--that old prejudices are not productive. "

voter wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:59 PM:

" Forgot about your standing on social issues--but I don't think they were asking droolers in that survey. "

voter wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:57 PM:

" Cancel that last question--forgot about that. "

voter wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:57 PM:

" Assuming that you are correct, Cogito, that liberals are plying frail elderly slackers with government services, like say healthcare, and, I don't know, how about food, in an effort to curry favor at the polls, what, in your opinion, would be the appropriate approach for these reprobates with no life savings? "

Cogito wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:55 PM:

" I've told you before, I'm a social liberal. "

Cogito wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:53 PM:

" Also, voter, the overwhelming majority of Vascular Dementia and Alzheimer's patients are elderly. Age and wisdom don't necessarily go hand in hand. "

voter wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:50 PM:

" The article in LiveScience says "The surveys assessed attitudes on politics, economics, race, gender, religion and sexuality issues. In some cases, such as racial issues and questions of civil liberties for communists, the researchers measured a greater change toward liberalism in older people than in younger people."

It would seem that more is at play here than irresponsible savings for retirement. "

Cogito wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:41 PM:

" Voter, liberals spend more taxpayer money on government programs in order to buy elderly votes. The majority of elderly have failed to plan properly for their retirement and want to be taken care of. Lack of monetary wisdom? you bet! "

voter wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:18 PM:

" Peer reviewed study finding people become more liberal with age (wisdom?)

http://news.aol.com/story/_a/people-become-more-liberal-with-age/20080311091309990001


"

Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:54 PM:

" LOL! "

voter wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:53 PM:

" Laughing so hard it hurts!!!!!!

Brian whines, "bloodletting" ??? "you have no idea what I have endured blogging here." ???? !!!!

I think it's time to invoke St. Isidore, Patron Saint of the Internet, for help, Brian, because that's what you'll need to find reputable sources to substantiate your claims.

As for the "injecting humor" part--Amen. "

Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:47 PM:

" Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:45 PM:

Oh boy, you took the bait and ran with it again. You've got a lot of nerve to say you don't instigate things to further an argument.


Hmmm.... this particular bit of bait tasted very much like cheddar. "

Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:46 PM:

" So, Brian...

Can you cite a single published study that shows that people become more conservative as they gain more wisdom?

A peer reviewed article perhaps?

Or were you really just making that stuff up as you went along? "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:45 PM:

" Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:39 PM:

" Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:28 PM:

It does make for good entertainment
on Leonard's behalf to further the bloodletting.

Bloodletting???

That's what you call a request for a source? Bloodletting?

I think someone is being a bit of a drama queen.

Oh boy, you took the bait and ran with it again. You've got a lot of nerve to say you don't instigate things to further an argument. "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:42 PM:

" OTH wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:33 PM:

" Does anyone hear violins playing?

OTH, you just had to ruin the moment with your nauseating reply. "

Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:39 PM:

" Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:28 PM:

It does make for good entertainment
on Leonard's behalf to further the bloodletting.


Bloodletting???

That's what you call a request for a source? Bloodletting?

I think someone is being a bit of a drama queen. "

OTH wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:33 PM:

" Does anyone hear violins playing? "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:28 PM:

" It does make for good entertainment
on Leonard's behalf to further the bloodletting. I can't say many of us haven't enabled him. He does tend to take the bait and run with it.
There is no malice involved, although it seems to look that way at times.
I really enjoy the food for thought I get from these bloggs. Inserting a little bit of drama and humor makes it all that more interesting and entertaining. "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:18 PM:

" girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 2:31 PM:

" I (girard74) wrote, 'Nowhere have I ever read of Leonard threatening you, bullying you or any such tactics to get his point across.

Girard74,And you never saw leonard making claims that I posted a link from a Nazi website. I lost count the numerous occasions when Leonard distorted what I said to suit his agenda. Obviously you have no idea what I have endured blogging here. It seems to me Leonard has you eating out of his hands too all the while many others share my sentiments about Leonard. "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:12 PM:

" Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 6:14 PM:

" girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 2:24 PM:

Nowhere have I ever read of Leonard threatening you, bullying you or any such tactics to get his point across.

To be fair, I think Brian probably meant that he felt threatened by my arguments.

HA HA HA Your flimzy arguments. I can see why Real Facts does what he does to you.

Get over yourself Leonard. "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:09 PM:

" girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 2:01 PM:

" Brian stated, 'There are many studies that back this up. As I'm sure there are studies that back up the contrary.'

Here again you state what appears to be a 'fact' while at the same time stating your 'opinion' regarding '[You’re] sure there are studies ... to the contrary.' You should be able to support your 'fact' with evidence;

So you and your cronies can pick it apart. It's not so outlandish that you can't find these studies for yourself.
I'm tired of Leonard (and now you)
picking me apart. They do exist.
"

Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 6:14 PM:

" girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 2:24 PM:

Nowhere have I ever read of Leonard threatening you, bullying you or any such tactics to get his point across.


To be fair, I think Brian probably meant that he felt threatened by my arguments. "

OTH wrote on Mar 29, 2008 2:50 PM:

" Leonard LOL That was too easy. "

voter wrote on Mar 29, 2008 2:33 PM:

" Thanks, girard, you expressed my sentiments exactly. We've had some GREAT discussions here the past few weeks--civil and informative. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 2:31 PM:

" I (girard74) wrote, 'Nowhere have I ever read of Leonard threatening you, bullying you or any such tactics to get his point across.'

I also want to point out that I have never heard of or read of Leonard employing such tactics against anyone else. After reading what I originally posted, I felt that perhaps some might conclude that I was playing fast and loose with my words. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 2:24 PM:

" Brian - when you reduce the debate here to personal confrontations, threats and fear of threats, you lose credibility.

Nowhere have I ever read of Leonard threatening you, bullying you or any such tactics to get his point across.

As I've always stated and believe, 'debate' is NEARLY a contact sport; you've got to grow thick skin to get a seat at the table; you've got to have your facts and opinions in good order to retain that seat.

Try to not defend your stand on any issue by accusing others of being 'unfair' or pushing you around. It simply doesn't hold water. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 2:01 PM:

" Brian stated, 'There are many studies that back this up. As I'm sure there are studies that back up the contrary.'

Here again you state what appears to be a 'fact' while at the same time stating your 'opinion' regarding '[You’re] sure there are studies ... to the contrary.' You should be able to support your 'fact' with evidence; you have no obligation to produce any evidence for your 'opinion,' although it would be helpful to advance that opinion further than this one lowly blog. The words ‘are’ and ‘sure there are’ have distinctly different meanings.

Understand? "

girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 1:56 PM:

" Brian, you stated, 'Statisitics show that as we gain more wisdom we tend to become more conservative.'

My response to Leonard, to a large degree acknowledging his humor, was to encourage you to cite the source of your 'statistics.'

I believe in conservative principles, this is true. I do not, however, make broad statements in support of those beliefs without some sort of basis for my contentions.

You stated that you possessed knowledge of these 'stats;' it now behooves you to reveal your source. Otherwise, many might believe that you're simply creating these 'facts' out of whole cloth - that's potentially damaging. "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 1:56 PM:

" Leonard, I hope we have the chance to meet someday and have a conversation face to face. I do suspect you'll try to bully me with your ability to fight and you may even go as far as taking a swing at me if I don't agree with your position. You may get away with it with your aquaintances in Lodi.
But I won't be intimidated. You just keep on making childish remarks to marginalize me and others. I know it makes you feel superior. I will pray for you. "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 1:50 PM:

" There's no doubt that Obama's skeletons are far more damaging to his campaign than McCain's.

It's unfortunate that there are so many who have blind faith for him. "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 1:47 PM:

" Girard74, I thought you were a conservative. Evidently you and others don't consider conservatism a good thing. It's almost as if you are saying that one who claims to be more conservative as they have gained more wisdom as call for their head to be examined. Perhaps you and your new found cronies whould explain to me why
as a person matures they become more conservative? There are many studies that back this up. As I'm sure there are studies that back up the contrary. "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 1:41 PM:

" voter wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:37 AM:

" Brian, what's up with the anti-feminism? How do equal rights for women threaten you? "

Some of those things in my post at 7:52 don't disturb you I see.
Nor did the activites at the folsom street fair disturb you either. You've made that quite clear. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 1:21 PM:

" Leonard wrote, 'If the source of Brian's statement was anything other than his colon, I urge him by all means to post it.'

And I, like you, anxiously await his reply in this regard. "

Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 1:04 PM:

" girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 10:21 AM:

While hilarious, I would think permitting Brian to post his source(s) for his claim before starting with the intestinal comic relief would be fair. Very funny, though!!


If the source of Brian's statement was anything other than his colon, I urge him by all means to post it. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 10:57 AM:

" OTH wrote, 'Leonard while I don't think he had progressed to dementia you could tell on occasion from watching him speak that something might not be right.'

Perhaps you're right about Reagan. However, nearly every time I listened to Bill Clinton speak I KNEW that something was decidedly not right. "

OTH wrote on Mar 29, 2008 10:35 AM:

" Leonard while I don't think he had progressed to dementia you could tell on occasion from watching him speak that something might not be right. "

OTH wrote on Mar 29, 2008 10:33 AM:

" WY damn you're on a roll this a.m. You go! "

girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 10:21 AM:

" Leonard asked, 'Or... could it possibly be that you are just pulling this absurdly laughable assertion out of the deepest recesses of your colon?'

While hilarious, I would think permitting Brian to post his source(s) for his claim before starting with the intestinal comic relief would be fair. Very funny, though!! "

Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 10:05 AM:

" girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:31 AM:

At that time the only way to diagnose Alzheimer’s was with an autopsy (ok, no wise jokes here). I believe identifying the disease now, while not exact, is more accurate


They still can't make a positive diagnosis without an autopsy. What can be identified is the symptoms, such as dementia and forgetfulness. I don't think Reagan had progressed as far as dementia while in office. "

Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 10:01 AM:

" Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:23 AM:

Statisitics show that as we gain more wisdom we tend to become more conservative.


ROTFLMAO!!!!!

"STATISTICS"???

What statistic, exactly, would those be Brian? Do you have a study that you are citing? Perhaps a Team W government report???

Or... could it possibly be that you are just pulling this absurdly laughable assertion out of the deepest recesses of your colon?

"

sam wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:44 AM:

" I hear ya, G. "

sam wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:42 AM:

" g said "At that time the only way to diagnose Alzheimer’s was with an autopsy (ok, no wise jokes here). I believe identifying the disease now, while not exact, is more accurate. "

G, you are correct. One of my brothers is smack in the middle of Alzheimer’s research. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:37 AM:

" Brian asked, 'The question remains: Will Hillary join McCain as an attempt to redeem herself given...'

As ethically, morally and honesty bankrupt as Hillary Clinton is, there is no where on earth she can 'redeem' herself. As I've stated on numerous occasions, this person is simply 'bad' for America. I rarely ever make that distinction about another human or citizen; years of exposure to this toxic excuse for a human being simply permit me to come to this conclusion.

Gee, does anyone think I really don't 'like' Hillary? Sometimes I wonder if I'm being clear. "

voter wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:37 AM:

" Brian, what's up with the anti-feminism? How do equal rights for women threaten you? "

girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:31 AM:

" OTH wrote, 'girard74 it is my understanding that Reagan was in the first stages of Alzheimers while in office.'

At that time the only way to diagnose Alzheimer’s was with an autopsy (ok, no wise jokes here). I believe identifying the disease now, while not exact, is more accurate.

Regardless, no one should be prohibited from running for president because he/she is 'old.' The voters, however, should certainly take into consideration not only the age of the person 'when' elected; but also as time rolls on during his/her administration.

It IS a very valid concern. (IMO) (no 'H'). "

sam wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:27 AM:

" feminist

adjective
1. of or relating to or advocating equal rights for women

noun
1. a supporter of feminism "

sam wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:26 AM:

" fem·i·nism [fem-uh-niz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men.
2. (sometimes initial capital letter) an organized movement for the attainment of such rights for women.
3. feminine character. "

sam wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:25 AM:

" I disagree 100% with:

Brian Mar 29, 2008 7:52 AM:
"

sam wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:23 AM:

" Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 7:44 AM:
" At this point it seems Hillary is just acting out a vendetta against Obama and the voters who robbed her of the nomination that she thinks she deserved."

We, here, have noticed the same thing. She acts like the presidency is "her right", not an elected office.


"

sam wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:21 AM:

" Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 7:39 AM:
" What do you all think about these rumors that McCain may make Hillary his VP? "

WOW, that would be wierd. "

sam wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:17 AM:

" Brian, Obama is NO Bush. I am embarassed how Bush let his advisors take control.

I believe Obama will take their advise, not give over his presidency to them. There is a huge difference. "

sam wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:15 AM:

" Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 7:51 AM:
" Will all the feminist supporters of Obama please stand up. "

I am stnding up ! "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:57 AM:

" WY, we would not only have the Hildabeast, but the beast on the hill,
the beast on top of Bill, billed a beast, and a Clintonbeasta. "

OTH wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:53 AM:

" girard74 it is my understanding that Reagan was in the first stages of Alzheimers while in office.

I find that rather disturbing. As far as I know no one bothered to tell the public. I don't want to take away from McCain solely on his age, but when you combine everything together it is concerning.

"

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:53 AM:

" Bry Wrote: The black leaders, including Obama, continue to instill the racist, victim mindset in the black community while vilifying the so called "evil white man". The perfect excuse for no accountability.

My sentiments exactly. This is another example of how Obama's skeletons will be his undoing. "

OTH wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:46 AM:

" Leonard remember with Hillary comes Billary. Do you think McCain wants those two running around the West Wing? I have heard Hillary described in a VP position as the Democratic Dick Cheney. "

WY wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:44 AM:

" I hate her voice and her old man's crooked pointer finger.... that he points again. He use to bend it and point with his knuckle, but now he's back to pointing at people he talks AT. "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:29 AM:

" Girard74, Yep, Hear Hear "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:28 AM:

" Actually there are probably more feminists supporting Hillary.

Will we then see a change of heart for the feminist movement? There may be hope for even the most liberal of the liberal movement. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:24 AM:

" Leonard asked, 'What do you all think about these rumors that McCain may make Hillary his VP?'

Certainly those are just rumors. 'If' such a scenario were to play out, the screams of agony from both parties would be heard 'round the world!

There would be either a record low turnout for the general election because no one would want to vote for anyone; or else there would be a record high turnout with people voting for Ralph Nader or writing in 'Bozo the Clown.’ My money would be on Bozo. "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:23 AM:

" The question remains: Will Hillary join McCain as an attempt to redeem herself given her parents roots are Goldwater
conservatives?

We may very well see her cross the aisle. Statisitics show that as we gain more wisdom we tend to become more conservative. I'll be the first to concragulate her. "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 8:16 AM:

" At this point, I think those in the Obama camp who are still quietly but not too indescretely chanting the Rev. Wright mantra are just making fools of themselves. "

The skeletons in Obama's closet are far more destructive to his campaign than McCain's will ever be.
"

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 7:59 AM:

" Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 7:39 AM:

" What do you all think about these rumors that McCain may make Hillary his VP? "

It may only be a ploy for those supporting Hillary to look the McCain way if she drops out. My thinking is, he's testing the waters. I'm dubious she will be VP. "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 7:52 AM:

" The feminist "scholarly article" that claimed that deer hunters are simply acting out their fantasies of raping underage women

The feminist prof who helped shield a lying feminist colleague from scrutiny for her misdeeds, resulting in the tarnishing of an innocent man’s reputation

The Northern Kentucky University professor who invited her students to "express their freedom-of-speech rights" by destroying a pro-life display

The Chapel Hill professor who wrote approvingly about erotic relationships between human beings and dogs

The Society for Cutting Up Men Manifesto – an incitement to hatred and violence now enshrined in the library of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

How the feminist movement has college girls acting like prostitutes, talking like prostitutes, and looking like prostitutes

How the feminist attachment to postmodernism has resulted in widespread academic and personal dishonesty

The unhinged professor who tried to destroy Adams’ career by making numerous false charges against him -- including the claim that he sprayed tear gas in her office!

The lesbian coed who boasted in her student newspaper about using federally subsidized student aid money to buy sex toys

The feminist professor who defended homosexual activists who defamed and hurled racist slurs at two women who dared protest a showing of the play The Vagina Monologues

How feminists generally lack the courage to act as individuals -- and, when challenged, often react wildly and with a virtually total lack of self-control

Feminists’ husbands: even more irritating than feminists

The feminist affinity for Communism "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 7:51 AM:

" Will all the feminist supporters of Obama please stand up. "

Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 7:44 AM:

" At this point it seems Hillary is just acting out a vendetta against Obama and the voters who robbed her of the nomination that she thinks she deserved. "

Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 7:39 AM:

" What do you all think about these rumors that McCain may make Hillary his VP? "

Leonard wrote on Mar 29, 2008 7:39 AM:

" Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 7:24 AM:

Many of Obama's supporters probably felt like they were being thrown under the bus when the words of Rev. Wright came to the surface. Only then did Obama distance himself from the man.
This won't go away any time soon. He may get the nomination. He will be scared of McCain.


Obama addressed this issue in a speech that has drawn accolades from across the political spectrum. He has moved on.

At this point, I think those in the Clinton/McCain camp who are chanting this mantra are just making fools of themselves. "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 7:32 AM:

" girard74 wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:58 AM:

" Does anyone realize what Howard Dean did this morning? By insisting that the 'super'delegates decide who they support by July 1 (in order to avoid problems at the convention), he just changed the course of this nomination.

It just goes to show the Dems will do anything to get back in the White House.

And to those that question them...

HOW DARE YOU!

"

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 7:24 AM:

" Sam Wrote: AMEN. That is why I love the guy. He does not react emotionally, does not throw his friends under the bus, and he has class. Hey, if he lacks knowledge on a topic, he has proven to me that he will hire the appropriate advisors.

Many of Obama's supporters probably felt like they were being thrown under the bus when the words of Rev. Wright came to the surface. Only then did Obama distance himself from the man.
This won't go away any time soon. He may get the nomination. He will be scared of McCain. "

Brian wrote on Mar 29, 2008 7:10 AM:

" Sam Wrote: AMEN. That is why I love the guy. He does not react emotionally, does not throw his friends under the bus, and he has class. Hey, if he lacks knowledge on a topic, he has proven to me that he will hire the appropriate advisors. "

And then sheo goes on to write: Voter... After the Frontline "Bush's War" I am well aware of how the "advisors" can take control. Scary stuff. "

So, given her take on Obama is he lacks knowledge she gives him a pass. Will his advisors take control too? Most likely. Scary Stuff.
"

girard74 wrote on Mar 28, 2008 9:42 PM:

" OTH wrote, 'This is just my opinion but this man has got to be feeling some major discomfort. Could his misstatements be from fatigue and chronic discomfort?'

Valid concerns demanding honest answers. While any natural citizen over the age of 35 may seek the office, not all are qualified to attain it for a number of valid reasons. Age by itself is not necessarily valid; yet advanced age resulting in faulty memory or simply the lack of energy to keep up with the daily rigor may be valid. "

OTH wrote on Mar 28, 2008 8:45 PM:

" If I can make a HO. McCain is 71 years old. His body after all the torture is probably at least 20 years older than his chronological age.

Campaigning has got to be tough even for the younger candidates. This is just my opinion but this man has got to be feeling some major discomfort.
Could his misstatements be from fatigue and chronic discomfort? "

sam wrote on Mar 28, 2008 8:37 PM:

" voter said "we chose to live with a little imperfection. "

Voter, nicely said.

Jeez I wish I had a "pasta" saying apporpriate for the occasion. "

sam wrote on Mar 28, 2008 8:36 PM:

" G says" He/she gives you an explanation that doesn't quite lessen your concerns - yet he/she implores you to simply 'trust' him/her and everything will be alright. Do you marry him/her?"

G, I love being a chick. GO WITH YOUR GUT. My gut feelings have been amazingly accurate.

Go with your gut. "

sam wrote on Mar 28, 2008 8:33 PM:

" voter wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:03 PM:" Age? or too much control over his agenda by his staff of lobbyists? or something else? "

Voter... After the Frontline "Bush's War" I am well aware of how the "advisors" can take control. Scary stuff. "

sam wrote on Mar 28, 2008 8:28 PM:

" leonard said "The fact that Obama has refused to go negative in the face of almost absurd provocation is one of the reasons why he has my support. "

AMEN. That is why I love the guy. He does not react emotionally, does not throw his friends under the bus, and he has class. Hey, if he lacks knowledge on a topic, he has proven to me that he will hire the appropriate advisors. "

sam wrote on Mar 28, 2008 8:24 PM:

" G, sorry, for some reason I thought you were attacking Obama. I now see you are attacking all the candidates to get us to wake up and do our homework.

I guess I felt safe throwing my arguement into your FACE.

Oops.. sorry. I will try to pay attention. "

Brian wrote on Mar 28, 2008 8:18 PM:

" Leonard wrote: The fact that Obama has refused to go negative in the face of almost absurd provocation is one of the reasons why he has my support. "

This is the esssence of Obama's appeal.
This blind faith that people have that this man will transform this country has me worried given he has no idea where to start. I'm looking forward to seeing what cabinet position he'll be giving to Farakhan. Perhaps the office of Racial Equality.
"

voter wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:46 PM:

" girard, I think your Easter story illustrates what Noam Chomsky has described as the 80/20 split. 80% of the public doesn't much care about politics and issues as long as they are fed and entertained--they vote based on "hunches" and "feelings", and that's IF they vote. I wonder if that helps explain the high divorce rate too. LOL. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:40 PM:

" I had Easter dinner with some good friends of mine. Attending the meal was the mother of one of my friends. When the subject turned to the election, she interjected that she was going to vote for Hillary because she liked the way she talked - not what she 'said,' but simply by the way she delivered the words.

Further inquiry revealed that this woman hadn't voted since 1968; wasn't registered and really didn't know who Obama was and why he should be allowed to run (his name caused her to believe he wasn't even a citizen). I had to laugh. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:36 PM:

" voter stated, 'I think most of us have married someone who is not quite perfect. We all have issues that are "deal breakers"--faults that we cannot abide. In the absence of "deal breakers", we chose to live with a little imperfection.'

C'mon voter - no one's talking about perfection here. We're talking about integrity and judgment.

I believe that if more people approached their 'courting' with a little more care, perhaps there would be less spousal abuse and/or divorce. The same might be said regarding who we (collectively as the nation) choose as our president. (IMHO) "

voter wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:31 PM:

" I think most of us have married someone who is not quite perfect. We all have issues that are "deal breakers"--faults that we cannot abide. In the absence of "deal breakers", we chose to live with a little imperfection. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:26 PM:

" Okay, how about this - You're dating and you meet a guy/gal that you really 'like' by first impressions. As time goes on this guy/gal keeps looking better and better - what a catch!!

And then one day you discover something about this person that causes you to pause and think. You approach this guy/gal and ask for an explanation about this matter. He/she gives you an explanation that doesn't quite lessen your concerns - yet he/she implores you to simply 'trust' him/her and everything will be alright. Do you marry him/her?

Why would we 'marry' anyone as president under similar circumstances? "

girard74 wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:08 PM:

" voter asked about McCain, 'Age? or too much control over his agenda by his staff of lobbyists? or something else?'

That is what needs to be determined if, in fact, there is a discrepancy worth investigation. No, I'm not backing off of McCain. However, this guy has found himself in the enviable/unenviable position of running his general campaign by himself in March.

From what I've heard from Obama and Clinton regarding their economic solutions, there appears to be a question as to how these programs will be 'paid' for.

The general election doesn't begin until September. Lots of questions to be asked/answered. "

voter wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:03 PM:

" Girard, I believe that McCain has listed his stance on all the main issues point by point on his website--I looked at it briefly a few days ago. He had given an interview with the Wall Street Journal and endorsed a plan for Social Security that was different than the one posted on his web site--he was unaware of the difference when the interviewer questioned him. Age? or too much control over his agenda by his staff of lobbyists? or something else? "

girard74 wrote on Mar 28, 2008 6:56 PM:

" You see, from where I sit right now, it's ‘somewhat’ apparent as to 'who will vote for who' in this election (on this blog). I've only decided who I will most certainly 'not' vote for - Clinton.

At this point in the 'game' McCain is already attempting to run his presidential campaign while the Democrats continue to duke it out. McCain is being cautious, as well he should be - he's got the luxury of time to pump up his image while at the same time determine how and when he will put forth his actual platform. Time will certainly tell. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 28, 2008 6:51 PM:

" voter stated, 'girard, there are some other issues with McCain, besides age, which I believe need to be investigated.'

Just to be clear, when I stated, '...to name but a few,...' of matters requiring examination and scrutiny for McCain (and everyone else), I wasn't kidding. "

Leonard wrote on Mar 28, 2008 6:47 PM:

" sam wrote on Mar 28, 2008 4:46 PM:
"
OTH, politics are personal. I do understand that. I just do not understand why people "throw everything" at Obama yet it is a No No to talk about Monica, Paula Jones, and MOST important Bill's perjury. Yeah, he is trustworthy all right.... "I did not sexual relations with that woman."


The fact that Obama has refused to go negative in the face of almost absurd provocation is one of the reasons why he has my support. "

voter wrote on Mar 28, 2008 6:46 PM:

" girard, there are some other issues with McCain, besides age, which I believe need to be investigated. I have not looked into these yet--so just tossing them out here for discussion. Various analysts have described his economic plan as irresponsible--deep tax cuts while continuing massive war spending. The math doesn't work, even if earmarks were suspended and other programs are deeply cut. Also, his campaign is being run almost exclusively by lobbyists, and he's switched his stance ( to the right) on a number of issues since the campaign started (torture, tobacco, etc.) "

girard74 wrote on Mar 28, 2008 6:07 PM:

" sam wrote, 'You attack Obama for not denouncing his minister...'

Sam - you must have me mixed up with someone else. I haven't 'attacked' any of these candidates. Most recently, in support of my belief that Obama can choose to befriend anyone he chooses, I even expressed my opinion that Wright is not 'un-American' as so many have suggested. He, like all of us, has his right to speak what he believes. From what I have heard from and about him, I simply don't agree with him.

As far as all the presidential candidates are concerned, Obama included, my stance has always been to judge them based upon their ‘fitness’ and their ‘judgment’. That’s it. Obama’s relationship with his pastor, while certainly permissible and understandable, does raise questions as to his sense of ‘judgment’. Is this choice of pastor, friend, and mentor indicative of how he will manage his personal or professional relationships as our president? Obama has recently somewhat ‘denounced’ what Wright has espoused during the past 20 years that he (Obama) has been a member of Wright’s church; but what was the impetus for this denunciation? Was it truly because he believes Wright is ‘on the fringe’ or was it simply out of political expediency? These are valid questions and concerns that I, as someone who will consider him ‘my’ president if he wins, am rightfully deserving of answers.

When Obama burst on the scene I, like many others, were impressed with his ‘presence.’ He speaks well; he doesn’t belittle his opponents; he seems to be the ‘genuine’ article. Recent events surrounding his believability have left me scratching my head; just ‘who’ is the real Obama? Is he just like every other politician? This goes to the man’s integrity – his ‘fitness’ for the enormous position that he desires so badly. I’m not suggesting that you (sam and anyone else) follow these same criterions in determining who you should vote for – that’s as personal as the choice you decide to make.

Ah, but then there’s Hillary Clinton! I’ve tried not to be secretive in my opinion of her – I loathe Hillary. I do not believe one word of what comes out of her mouth, regardless of the subject matter. It is my well-researched belief that she ‘has been,’ ‘is,’ and ‘will be’ bad for America. Under no circumstances will I ever cast a vote for her. In fact, I switched parties for the California primary for the sole reason of voting against her; and I do not believe my vote to have been wasted, regardless of the outcome of that contest. I have recently submitted a Letter-to-the-Editor regarding an aspect of Hillary heretofore not explored or exposed (from what I have been able to discern).

In response to someone insisting that I’ve been giving McCain a pass (in that case on the matter of his ‘advanced age’) and that I don’t apply the same standard to him, I sincerely suggested that every aspect of McCain’s background, prior statements, experience and age, to name but a few, are and most certainly should be open to full disclosure and scrutiny. This is the most important job on earth, and that’s not just my ‘opinion.’ As such, EVERYTHING about those desiring the job should be investigated. "

sam wrote on Mar 28, 2008 4:46 PM:

" OTH, politics are personal. I do understand that. I just do not understand why people "throw everything" at Obama yet it is a No No to talk about Monica, Paula Jones, and MOST important Bill's perjury. Yeah, he is trustworthy all right.... "I did not sexual relations with that woman."

... and I do know you are being sarcastic..hee hee. "

OTH wrote on Mar 28, 2008 4:00 PM:

" girard74 sorry that should be answered my "own" question. "

OTH wrote on Mar 28, 2008 3:59 PM:

" Sam I'm shocked. You don't consider Hillbilly trustworthy? They can't wait to rent out rooms in the White House. They may already have a reservation list somewhere. I'm disappointed in you Sam. LOL I have to stop or I'm gonna get into trouble. Still laughing.

"

OTH wrote on Mar 28, 2008 3:53 PM:

" girard74 if I wanted to vote for McCain how would I know what his ideas for the economy are? This country is in the crapper as far as the economy and he has no comment.

I answered my on question, I just don't vote for him. That was easy.

Now if he is elected and the country falls furthur into the abyss people who did vote for him will know why. The rest of us are just screwed. "

sam wrote on Mar 28, 2008 11:53 AM:

" g said "However, you aren't running for President of the United States.... In order to convince the majority of the people that he is 'fit' requires that he be trustworthy."

Well there ya have it. Look who Hill is sleeping with. I would hardly call Bill "trustworthy". You attack Obama for not denouncing his minister even though he denounced parts of his sermon, but say nothing about about who Hillary sleeps with. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 28, 2008 8:03 AM:

" OTH wrote, 'All McCain says is "I'm don't know much about economics."'

Now you're either being disingenuous or you are simply uninformed. McCain's admittance that economics is not his strong point served two goals: it DOES provide the voter with more information as to whether or not to vote for him; and it indicates that McCain is being honest regarding different aspects of the job which he seeks.

NO candidate is an 'expert' on all things the president is responsible for. That's why he must surround himself with people who can honestly and ethically advise him on all matters. "

OTH wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:59 AM:

" Cogito you're right. It is I have and not I've have. Damned education did it again. LOL "

girard74 wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:58 AM:

" Does anyone realize what Howard Dean did this morning? By insisting that the 'super'delegates decide who they support by July 1 (in order to avoid problems at the convention), he just changed the course of this nomination.

Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Kentucky, et al., no longer have the same value as they did yesterday. Knowing that these states would not fully decide who wins, at least without calling in these Party Hacks to 'fix' the problem, there was a purpose for campaigning vigorously - perhaps giving a more positive reason for settling the matter at the convention. Dean just screwed the Party(again). "

OTH wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:55 AM:

" Cogito re your 11:46 post, at least Obama has one. It may not be all that great at this point but the seed is there.

All McCain says is "I'm don't know much about economics." Helllllooooo You're running for President. That's just not going to cut it, as he was saying the same thing years ago. Surely at some point he could have picked up some basics? He voted on spending bills without knowing finance or economics? Even the basics? You want to talk scary stupid? Maybe his lobbying pals will take uptheslack. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:47 AM:

" OTH - you may or may not have recognized this but during your Mar 27, 2008 11:20 PM post you are arguing with yourself. In one sentence, you claim it's time to get on with this election and stop the examination of the candidates.

In two subsequent sentences you offer good, thoughtful reasons why this process should continue.

Could it be that you believe the Democrats' candidates are ready for prime-time and the Republican nominee is not?

I suggest that the majority of American voters would disagree with you on both points.

As far as us having to 'trust' someone - who says so? "

girard74 wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:25 AM:

" OTH wrote, 'We can scrutinize til the cows come home and it may not change a thing except to waste time.'

Sure, if you've made your decision, fine. However, 'time' is on our side (Rolling Stones) is a good thing here. The more we 'scrutinize' the better - there's no such thing as 'too much' as it pertains to the Presidency.

Don't worry, McCain will get his 'due' during the general election. I stated on a previous blog that perhaps the Republicans had ended their primary too soon; I wasn't kidding.

All of this is good for our country; not bad at all. "

Lodian wrote on Mar 28, 2008 12:25 AM:

" girard made some great points (10:20 PM).

"

Cogito wrote on Mar 27, 2008 11:48 PM:

" "I HAVE", not I've have. It's late. "

Cogito wrote on Mar 27, 2008 11:46 PM:

" OTH, Obama stated some of his economic policy yesterday, and it was some of the most ignorant and clueless crap I've have ever heard. I hope if he is elected, he puts someone in charge who has a clue as to what they're talking about, because he obviously does not. His ideas are scary stupid. "

Cogito wrote on Mar 27, 2008 11:40 PM:

" Girard, regarding your 4:27 comment, dude, you are sooooooo good! "

OTH wrote on Mar 27, 2008 11:20 PM:

" girard74 I guess I will just have to throw my hat in the ring. LOL At some point we have to trust somebody. We can scrutinize til the cows come home and it may not change a thing except to waste time.

McCain is getting a free pass from the Democrats because they're so busy accusing each other of wearing the wrong color underwear.

McCain has no economic policy, he says we will stay in Iraq until we "win", whatever the hell that means. His health could be a factor as well as his age. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 27, 2008 10:20 PM:

" OTH wrote, 'If Obama says Rev Wright is his friend and he is serious,it's good enough for me.'

And for you that should be perfectly good for anyone else.

However, you aren't running for President of the United States. You don’t want to be the 'Leader of the Free World.' Obama wants this position. In order to convince the majority of the people that he is 'fit' requires that he be trustworthy. More than that, however, is that he must exhibit the character necessary to make real tough decisions. As such, his personal history is open to scrutiny-as it should be. "

Lodian wrote on Mar 27, 2008 9:35 PM:

" OTH 8:55 PM: I agree.

"

sam wrote on Mar 27, 2008 9:28 PM:

" OTH, Amen and well said. "

OTH wrote on Mar 27, 2008 8:55 PM:

" The only thing I can say anymore about the Rev Wright thing is I have friends I've had for25+ years. Some of them do not live the life I do or would want to, but theirs works for them. If I needed something at 3 in the morning I could call them and know they will do whatever I need.

Having said that I would not for anything throw any one them under a bus in anyway. Friends don't do that to friends.

If Obama says Rev Wright is his friend and he is serious,it's good enough for me. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 27, 2008 8:32 PM:

" I've paid particular attention to news outlets over the course of the past few days as it relates to the 'possible' conclusion of the Democrat primary. As it now stands, Obama is mathematically ahead in both votes and delegates to the extent that Clinton cannot overtake his lead (without the so-called 'super'delegates).

If, as many now believe very well may occur, Clinton is awarded the nomination by way of these party 'leaders,' we will be witness to a revolution in Denver the likes of which has not been seen at a political event since the summer of '68 in Chicago. (IMHO) "

sam wrote on Mar 27, 2008 5:17 PM:

" Bry, please excuse my double post. "

sam wrote on Mar 27, 2008 5:17 PM:

" Actually Bry, I did not find his sermons to be filled with hate nor were they filled with anti-american crap. Listen to at least one entire sermon before you condemn him.

Don't be afraid to listen and judge for yourself. "

sam wrote on Mar 27, 2008 5:15 PM:

" Actually Bry, I did not find his sermons to be filled with hate nor were they filled with anti-american crap. Listen to at least one entire sermon before you condemn him. "

sam wrote on Mar 27, 2008 5:13 PM:

" Scout, I do agree with you 100%. "

sam wrote on Mar 27, 2008 5:12 PM:

" Bry, I have listened to quite a few of Wright's sermons in their entirety. While I do not agree with 100% in his sermon, I do agree with 90%. I find him to be uplifting and enjoyed listening. May I suggest that you give his entire sermon a chance before condemning the man by the snippets put together by the hews media. Form your own opinion. I thought the guy was appalling until I took the time to listen to him. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 27, 2008 4:27 PM:

" scout wrote, 'Obama addressed your concerns in arguably one of the best speeches in mordern US history.'

'Arguably' being the operative word. There are others who believe that it was one of the best 'side-stepping,' self-serving, issue-evading speeches made in all history. I lean toward the latter. "

scout wrote on Mar 27, 2008 3:42 PM:

" should read: modern. Sorry for the typo. "

scout wrote on Mar 27, 2008 3:42 PM:

" Bry: Obama addressed your concerns in arguably one of the best speeches in mordern US history. Here you go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWe7wTVbLUU
"

Bry wrote on Mar 27, 2008 2:12 PM:

" Sam: I'll bet you believe that people are stupid enough to accept that you think Obama didn't know his pastor was and is a hateful racist anti-American. One would have to be a complete idiot to believe Obama didn't know or believe that you don't think Obama knew. "

Bry wrote on Mar 27, 2008 2:02 PM:

" Sam: Unlike Jeremiah Wright, O'Grady hid his peverted conduct so of course those in attendance had no clue. However, Obama's mentor and spiritual leader (Jeremiah Wright) has been spewing his racist hate and anti-American crap for 20 years as those in attendance cheer him on. That is why Obama continues to give tens of thousands of dollars to Trinity Church each year. The black leaders, including Obama, continue to instill the racist, victim mindset in the black community while vilifying the so called "evil white man". The perfect excuse for no accountability. "

sam wrote on Mar 27, 2008 8:41 AM:

" Bry, and I bet you believe that all those Catholics who attended St Anne's Church during the time O"Grady was there supported his child abuse, right? "

Bry wrote on Mar 27, 2008 3:02 AM:

" Bill Maher and Al Franken are nothing more than failed comdeian pot heads. Of course their going to push for liberal agendas. And Jeremiah Wright, you know Obama's mentor and spiritual teacher is a hateful anti-white racist. And since Obama in 2007 gave over $80,000 to the Trinity Church, you can be certain that he supports the anti-American & racist hate that is being spewed by the Pastor. Anyone that states Obama didn't know about the racist hate & anti-American rhetoric coming from the Trinity Church are either totally clueless or lying for a selfminded cause. "

Gator wrote on Mar 24, 2008 8:49 AM:

" I guess you could say yes to that question as he is no different than any
other political hack, scratch off the
surface and what do you see?? Just a
silver tongue snake oil salesman.He layed down with the wolves for 20 years so I would say he came away with a few
fleas...So before you all get pithy
I will say The Rev Wright is no better
or worse than Pat Robertson or Jerry
Falwell.None of them follow Jesus's or
Martin Luther Kings teachings which is
total forgiveness. Which if continued
could get them a very warm afterlife
"

Cogito wrote on Mar 23, 2008 9:20 PM:

" Voter, "Media Matters" is more biased than anything operated by Murdoch. "

Cogito wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:45 PM:

" O.K. it's spelled "Janeane Garofalo", just when you thought she couldn't get any more difficult. "

Cogito wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:41 PM:

" G, Bill Maher is a comedian who bounces most of his ideas off his friends at the Playboy mansion. I wouldn't put much stock in his ideas any more than I would Rosie O'Donnell, Jenine Garafalo, Rosanne Barr, or Al Franken. They're just angry that no one serious takes them seriously. "

Cogito wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:33 PM:

" Voter, cont., I loaned both of those books to one of my clients. After reading them, he was having lunch with his buddy, Stan Atkinson. He asked Stan if he'd read the books, and he had. He asked him if media bias was as bad as what was portrayed in the books. Stans reply was that it's way worse. That's from the mouth of an insider. "

Cogito wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:29 PM:

" Voter, you speak of Murdoch going on record for trying to sway public opinion. Well, at least he has the guts to admit it. I have a friend who is a front line reporter for Fox, and he has told me that he has never got any outside input on how to approach a single story. He has complete editorial control, and does almost everything live. I invite you to read "Biased" and "Arrogance" by Bernard Goldberg. He'll set you straight about exclusively leftist viewpoints from the MSM. "

Lodian wrote on Mar 23, 2008 5:49 PM:

" WY: That is a cute bunny! >oO; "

Lodian wrote on Mar 23, 2008 5:48 PM:

" Happy Easter! "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 10:52 AM:

" sam wrote about Maher, 'He said McCain is a warrior who is dumb about war. Now that is a scary thought.'

Yeah, and I've heard many things come from Maher that make me afraid about him (Maher). "

WY wrote on Mar 23, 2008 10:34 AM:

" I have too much reading to get caught up. I have eggs to dye! Have a nice day in the Sonshine.:) "

WY wrote on Mar 23, 2008 10:33 AM:

" Minus the T "

WY wrote on Mar 23, 2008 10:33 AM:

" Are you squarte dance'n.... have'n square talk??? what's with the squares??? "

WY wrote on Mar 23, 2008 10:32 AM:

" YOu guys are a square bunch today. "

WY wrote on Mar 23, 2008 10:31 AM:

" HAPPY EASTER MY FRIENDS. Just got in from Church and the big hunt.
HE has Risen...

And He brought the rabit taboot! Now it's time to relax and EAT!
You all have a great Day! >oO; "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 10:30 AM:

" I like Bill Maher. He is so off the wall. But he said something today that made me stop and think.

He said McCain is a warrior who is dumb about war. Now that is a scary thought. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 10:21 AM:

" Sam, but you're right. Perhaps the three instances suggest that something other than age is in play here. Just how up to speed is McCain on foreign affairs? Does he really understand the nature of al Qaeda in the region? Does he know anything at all?

These are legitimate concerns that his opposition, as well as we, should hold him accountable to answer. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 10:16 AM:

" sam wrote, 'It was not the one time... it happened 3 times on that trip. The same mis comment. That scares me.'

Even if it had been but the one instance, his age would/should give rise to the concern about handing over such responsibility.

Okay, I'll take more flak for this, but there are many who believe Reagan was 'asleep at the wheel' during much of the later years of his presidency. (Hold down the laughter!!)

It is because of just that thought that age has become so important. I've wanted to be president but because of my physical limitations, I resist the urge to run. If it wasn’t because of this old body of mine giving out, I’d be a shoe-in!!! I’d be President G. Oooh, I’d be known as “G” much like “W”!! Whatta ya think? Cool, huh? "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 10:10 AM:

" G said: "Recently in the Middle East, McCain stated something erroneous about Iran and al Qaeda; he immediately corrected himself (granted after Lieberman whispered in his ear). Did that end my concern? No. "

It was not the one time... it happened 3 times on that trip. The same mis comment. That scares me. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 9:27 AM:

" Sam, as far as 'mistakes' are concerned, I really do try to give the benefit of the doubt and see past the error.

Recently in the Middle East, McCain stated something erroneous about Iran and al Qaeda; he immediately corrected himself (granted after Lieberman whispered in his ear). Did that end my concern? No.

Age IS an issue with McCain (one of many, I'm sure). Therefore, it needs to be determined if these 'mistakes' are somehow related to his advanced age and possibly something more serious than just the pressures of being in a campaign. Everything should be evaluated. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 9:17 AM:

" sam asked, 'Yet when Obama dives in and makes a mistake (according to you) using the phrase "White people" when referring to his white grandma, you are offended?'

First, I’m not offended and I don't believe the statement was a mistake (and I didn’t characterize it as such). Yet, I do believe it will come back to haunt him. Many people will ask if Obama’s grandmother truly is HIS ‘vision' of a white person that he stated as ‘typical.’ It’s a legitimate question. And there ARE those who will use that statement to further their hatred against Obama simply because he IS black.

Second, I am all for the open dialogue. As for who should be the president, it is important to understand a candidate's position on all matters, race included.

If I believe that Obama's (or anyone's) stand on race (or any other matter) runs contrary to my understanding of the qualifications for the job, I must take that into consideration before voting. That’s all. "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 9:03 AM:

" OTH, Tim is a rerun... I am off to watch Bill Maher. "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 9:03 AM:

" G, just curious. You say you want dialogue on race and we have to dive in and not be so sensitive to words. Yet when Obama dives in and makes a mistake (according to you) using the phrase "White people" when referring to his white grandma, you are offended?



"

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:58 AM:

" OTH wrote, 'Nothing wrong with it you chose to use the same word you wanted to avoid.'

I really 'hope' you don't believe that I wish to avoid the word or the concept.

My life is based upon 'hope.' Hope that my cancer won't return. Unfortunately, I know that just 'hope' won't guarantee that for which I want; reality often dishes out something entirely different. "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:57 AM:

" Nevermind.. he is on next on MSNBC. What a glorious morning... jammies with Tim. "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:56 AM:

" OTH, what channel is Tim on? I slept through his 6 am kcra show. "

OTH wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:56 AM:

" Sam it's called a gotcha! "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:56 AM:

" This time, when I line the bunnies up, I'm not going to let them 'hop around' to determine their status. No, I'm going to trick them!! I'll tell them if they do a little funny thing with their noses, like twitch them, then I'll know they don't want to be a part of the meal. That'll show 'em. Mmmmmm, I can taste the wabbit now!! "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:55 AM:

" I am in my jammies watching MSNBC.

I need to stop blogging and enjoy the jammie mode. "

OTH wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:55 AM:

" Girard74 I just noticed and find it interesting that you chose to use "hoping Kennedy would not be used as an example."

Instead of saying you don't believe Kennedy should be used as an example.

Nothing wrong with it you chose to use the same word you wanted to avoid.

I'm off to watch Russert. I'll be back.:) "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:53 AM:

" Wow, sam!! Thanks for the link. Now I can get to some 'stir fry wabbit.' "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:52 AM:

" GEEZ, it is too early for me.

HA ha ha...

"

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:51 AM:

" G, if you need a wok for cooking, you can use a frying pan with a rounded bottom instead of a flat bottom.
see:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://images.crateandbarrel.com/is/image/CrateandBarrel/ContemporaryNS12InchWok%3F%24lg%24&imgrefurl=http://www.crateandbarrel.com/family.aspx%3Fc%3D490%26f%3D2151&h=290&w=290&sz=8&hl=en&start=3&um=1&tbnid=oWVNpc0XxgLm1M:&tbnh=115&tbnw=115&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dwok%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den-us%26sa%3DN
"

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:47 AM:

" OTH, you were correct; I just caught that. You win!!! "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:46 AM:

" OTH answered, 'I think a wok is a chinese pan used for cooking. Or someone speaking really bad English. Can't believe I did that.'

No, a wok is what you throw at the wabbitt. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:45 AM:

" OTH asked, 'Okay girard74 so we never have hope with any candidate again?'

Of course not!! Hope is wonderful thing; it's essential for humans to have hope in order to get from one day to the next.

In the political arena hope is just as valuable; however, such 'hope' must be tempered by common sense and an acceptance of reality. "

OTH wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:45 AM:

" I think a wok is a chinese pan used for cooking. Or someone speaking really bad English. Can't believe I did that. "

OTH wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:42 AM:

" Okay girard74 so we never have hope with any candidate again?

We settle for the SSDD candidate every time?

I for one get tired of looking over the ballot at all the candidates names and saying "Is that all there is?" And then you start thinking okay which is the lesser of 2 evils? "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:41 AM:

" Does anyone know what a 'wok' is? "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:41 AM:

" G said "That's where I got my latest Glen Campbell CD. "

AWKKKKKKKKKKKKKK "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:39 AM:

" OTH, I love your spelling better ...Wascally Wabbit.
Perfect !! "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:38 AM:

" My son was harder, being the older man of 6. He needed to know "what it felt like". I said it is like a sneeze, it tickles and tickles and tickles and then explodes... and it feels good... something a 6 year old can understand.

Then he asked me what "Oral Sex" was. At 6 years old. I decided to throw it back to him asking what he thinks it is. He said he figured it was like oral reading, you just talk a lot while having sex. Works for me. But again the dialogue started and continued from there. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:37 AM:

" And to all of you, a Wonderful, Peaceful Easter! "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:36 AM:

" OTH wrote, 'I know, I know PBS is a left wing commie outfit. So What?:)'

Hey, I love PBS. That's where I got my latest Glen Campbell CD. "

OTH wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:35 AM:

" For those interested PBS is doing a 2 hour Frontline program Mon night on "Bush's War."

I know, I know PBS is a left wing commie outfit. So What?:) "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:34 AM:

" G, I love the "sex" story. My kids were exposed to a very incorrect version of sex at the ages of 4 and 6. I had to sit down and explain to them the proper definition of sex.
I talked to them separately, one being a boy and the youngest a girl.
The girl was easy. "Oh thats what those dogs are doing. The boy shoots babies into the the girl with his penis gun." Sounds good to me. We kept that dialogue open for the next 26 years. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:32 AM:

" OTH wrote, 'When you talk to people who remember what it was like with John Kennedy, the hope people felt. I'm not comparing the men, I'm comparing the feelings of hope people had.'

I was hoping that Kennedy would not be used as an example.

Yes, Kennedy ran on a 'hope' platform. He was eloquent, handsome and young. He spoke well, even with that Boston accent.

We'll never know just how 'great' he might have been. His legacy is not in his greatness; it is in his sacrifice – he is revered for all that he gave up at the hands of his assassin.

Let’s not forget that the only reason Kennedy was in Texas in November of 1963 was because he was in trouble; he had to shore up the southern vote to insure his re-election the following year. Remember the Bay of Pigs; was that not a fiasco?

I love Kennedy as much as anyone. I was in 1st grade in New Jersey on that day. I remember the whisper from the principal to my teacher; her leaving the room in tears and the announcement that school was ending early and that we were to go straight home. Those of us who had the capacity to remember will never forget. "

OTH wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:31 AM:

" Sam and girard74 Happy Bunny day to you both. And a glorious first day of spring it is!

So far I haven't seen the Wascally Wabbit but my cats are looking awful smug this morning. Maybe I'm wrong.:) "

OTH wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:27 AM:

" girard74 I'm going to copy this blog aand down the road I will have a hardcopy of you almost saying the W word. "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:27 AM:

" OTH said "Is Obama the one to help facilitate that beginning? I for one would like to think so. "

I hope so too.

Hey, Happy Easter to you... and happy first weekend of Spring !! "

OTH wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:25 AM:

" Sam in answer to your question about racism being well hidden I believe the answer is yes. I believe that's why people think we've come farther than we have.

When something like Rev. Wrights speech which is brutally honest hits people in the face they think "oh no hate speech. Racism." Why is it when we as white's say those things, it's free speech? When a black, Hispanic or any other race says them it's hate speech?

We can't have it both ways. And the hatemongers like the gasbag Limbaugh need to be dethroned. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:25 AM:

" OTH wrote, 'I respectfully submit it's a little early to know if Obama is one of the great ones.'

Accepted. I believe, however, based upon what I now know of the man, and how other 'great men' (not to the exclusion of women) have started their political careers, Obama will probably not be included in that esteemed category.

I could, however, be wrong. Wow, did I really say that? Remember how Fonzie couldn't say 'wwrro...'? "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:19 AM:

" In order for us to honestly address the issue of racism, we’ve got to get over our fear. As long as we are afraid to even discuss the issues, we’ll never get anywhere. And before we even start, we’ve got to stop erasing words from our dictionaries. When I was raising my children, I would do everything I could do to be there as their father; not their ‘friend’ or ‘buddy.’ They needed for me to be their leader and assist in guiding them to adulthood in a way to insure they had the very best chance at happiness and success.

But as a father of daughters, there were some things that I was so thankful my wife took care of; the first period; the ‘training’ bra; etc. Yet, there was one subject that I could not pawn off onto anyone else – sex. As my girls got older if I even used the word ‘sex’ in their presence their eyes would grow wide, their noses would crinkle and they’d hold their hands over their ears exclaiming, ‘No daddy, don’t say that word!’ It was a dilemma for me because regardless of their embarrassment and incessant denials to listen, I simply HAD to talk with them. So, whenever it was necessary to bring up the subject I would simply start by saying, ‘Sex, sex, sex, sex, sex.’ And for awhile they’d react as they always did. But after some time, just the ‘word’ was accepted into their lexicon (between they and I) and more importantly, my being able to utter the word opened the door for me to discuss the subject with them. Unfortunately, as they grew older, I learned possibly more than ‘I’ wanted to due to the relaxed nature of our relationship. But I wouldn’t change those relationships for anything.

Such is the nature of ‘racism.’ As long as we continue to exhibit our fear by saying ‘N’ word (as one example) during what should be rational, open discussions of the subject, how can we ever expect to resolve the problems at its heart? When Jeremiah Wright’s sermons were first aired, the ‘N’ word was permitted to be heard; yet after a short while the familiar ‘bleep’ was inserted so as to preserve our sensibilities (translated, ‘diminish our fears’). Gee, did the ‘bleep’ remove the word? Or better yet, did the ‘bleep’ dispose of its meaning? Did the ‘bleep’ solve the problem? No answer from me is necessary.

As long as we ‘bleep’ over these issues, we’ll never get a ‘bleeping’ thing done. (IMHO) "

OTH wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:17 AM:

" girard74 may I respectfully submit it's a little early to know if Obama is one of the great ones. There's a lot that has to happen before that becomes known. Do I believe he has the ability and qualities to do so, yes. "

OTH wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:13 AM:

" voter your post of 10:18 on 3/22.

I hardily agree we have come a long way and still have a long way to go towards racial equality or whatever you want to call it. The us and them mentality no longer works in this country other to be devisive.

Is Obama the one to help facilitate that beginning? I for one would like to think so.

When you talk to people who remember what it was like with John Kennedy, the hope people felt. I'm not comparing the men, I'm comparing the feelings of hope people had. "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:10 AM:

" G, and I also feel that he had to make that speech. Too many people took Rev Wright's snipets as being the entire sermon, rather than actually taking the time to hear his entire sermons.

I also believe there will be more speeches on the topic. Racism is alive in this country. It has improved with time... or is it just well hidden?? "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:05 AM:

" I disagree here...
"His one statement about his grandmother being a ‘typical white woman’ is going to haunt him unlike anything else."

His words accuarately discribe my Mother, my Mother-in-Law, my Grandma, my Aunts and most females (yes white) I know over 70.

Again, talking Black and White is difficult. "

sam wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:01 AM:

" Well said, G. I love these words.

"truly great men didn’t speak of things that were ‘easy’ or that simply made those who listened ‘feel’ good. The really great ones exhibited the courage and resolve to speak those things which, while uncomfortable and repulsive to our ears, simply needed to be said."
"

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 8:00 AM:

" The problem with Barack Obama is that he is not one of the great ones in our history. He revealed that to us unequivocally last week. While there are some who believe his ‘race’ speech was Lincoln-esque or the greatest speech on race in our time, one simply needs to look at ‘why’ the speech was delivered in the first place.

I submit that had Obama not found himself in the quandary he is now in, that speech would never have been conceived, written or delivered. He believed he HAD to make that speech in order for him to continue on his quest to become the President of the United States; not to ‘lift up’ Americans; not to further any just cause; no, he spoke simply to further his political aspirations. This is not the hallmark of any great man.

The amazing thing is that Obama simply didn’t need to make the speech at all. Regardless of the pundits OR the opinion polls; if Obama truly believed that he had done nothing wrong, why would he have felt the need to speak? If he truly believed that he ‘is’ the right man to be the president, why could he have not simply relied upon those very characteristics and qualifications that he has been insisting make him so qualified?

Nevertheless, that speech will prove to be much more than a ‘distraction’ if Obama is to become the Democrats’ nominee. His one statement about his grandmother being a ‘typical white woman’ is going to haunt him unlike anything else. For a man who, up until recent events, tried so desperately to ignore (or at the very least separate) race as an issue in this election, those three words have virtually guaranteed that much of the tenor of the general election will certainly be focused on racial issues. Irony is ironic, isn’t it? (IMHO) "

girard74 wrote on Mar 23, 2008 7:41 AM:

" I realized just recently how wrong I have been about Reverend Wright. Anyone who has ‘listened’ to me here knows that I do not consider his sermons as ‘racist.’ I have, however, referred to him and his rhetoric as ‘un-American.’ There is where I have been terribly mistaken. Jeremiah Wright is as ‘American’ as that word can possibly denote.

Wright’s mindset on race, while opinion, are also factual. I’ve listened to what he claims; there IS a history of government-sanctioned infecting of blacks with terrible diseases; who can say for certain that HIV/AIDS or any other disease is not transmitted in a similar fashion. I don’t believe it, but who can deny that it may just be possible.

One of the more disturbing statements by Wright was his ‘God Damn America’ speech. I HAVE listened to it and regardless of how he intended it to be received, Wright was absolutely accurate. There are many of us who actually believe that God, for whatever reason, has seen fit to bestow his own personal ‘blessing’ on America to the exclusion of all other nations on earth. Personally, I would like to believe that at the very least, the concept of our nation is something that God approves. But Wright, unlike many of us, believes that God doesn’t just look at what we would ‘like’ to be; He looks at who we are. And we have done and continue to do appalling things individually and as a nation. No, Wright wasn’t even suggesting that God ‘has’ damned America. One doesn’t even need to listen very closely to understand exactly what he is ‘asking’ God to do. Because of all the injustice, hatred, hypocrisy, etc., Wright was actually uttering an ‘open-eyed’ prayer ASKING that God damn America. It is clear (to me) that Wright was ‘suggesting’ that perhaps if God were to somehow change how the majority of us believes He views us, maybe we’d begin to institute some real change.

Free thought and speech, the cornerstone of this Democracy, is often taken for granted. Yet our history is clear that the truly great men didn’t speak of things that were ‘easy’ or that simply made those who listened ‘feel’ good. The really great ones exhibited the courage and resolve to speak those things which, while uncomfortable and repulsive to our ears, simply needed to be said. This is precisely what Reverend Wright has done in his church in Chicago. Reverend Wright is a true American in every sense of the word. "

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:48 PM:

" Now I just LOL... very loudly. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:42 PM:

" sam stated, 'now that you promised not to make stew out of him.'

Promise? What promise? "

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:36 PM:

" me too.

Good night. Sweet dreams about all those yummy candies that rascally rabbit is bringing you... now that you promised not to make stew out of him. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:34 PM:

" Good night, folks!! As always, it's been fun; and stimulating!! I do look forward to these discussions. "

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:31 PM:

" Nah, don't shut up. Never.

But if you are tired, just say good night. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:26 PM:

" No, having hope is not naïve; believing that we have arrived at the point where we can maturely discuss these issues may very well be.

Now, I'll shut up. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:24 PM:

" While I don't believe these radio hosts are racists, I do believe that they think they're smarter than their audiences. And there I may be correct.

If correct, Limbaugh actually led his followers to possibly give Texas to Clinton a few weeks ago. By instructing them to vote for her in order to throw the Democrats into chaos was irresponsible and incredibly immature.

Sean Hannity may very well be stupid. His constant railing about Wright has long since lost its luster. One needs to realize that once their point is made, wisdom dictates when they should shut up.

I'll shut up now. "

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:21 PM:

" I am sorry, but HOPE is never naive. HOPE gives us purpose and a reason to move forward.

"

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:18 PM:

" Girard, we have come a long way in this country. We still have a long way to go. You are correct that discussions of race are fraught with emotion and danger. Somewhere, sometime, we have to begin resolving these issues to move past the "us" and "them" mentality. Maybe you will be correct that any hope for rational discourse is naive. I chose to believe that maybe enough people are ready to set aside old hurts and prejudices to begin this difficult conversation. For now, we will have to respectfully agree to disagree. "

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:16 PM:

" G, have you listened to any of the complete sermons? "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:12 PM:

" voter asked, 'You wouldn't want us judging you based on the remarks of talk radio show hosts you listen to repeatedly.'

I would expect, if it was revealed that I placed a very high level of respect on such a 'host' that at the very least my judgment would be questioned, yes.

Would YOU vote for a man who consistently listed to Limbaugh, was a 'premium member' and had welcomed him into his home time after time?

Is Obama no less than a 20-year-'premium member' of his church which espouses certain beliefs? Shouldn't we evaluate his judgment? "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:00 PM:

" Swimming was an example because it has been brought up so often as stereotypical of blacks. As a result, in many circles the mention of it is deemed to be 'racist.'

On all of the networks over the past two weeks any time someone has attempted to address the issue of 'integrity' and 'fitness for the job,' 'racism' has nearly always reared its ugly head - by both blacks and non-blacks. The non-blacks based upon their political orientation.

Who is Obama (or anyone) kidding? Does he really believe that there can be rational discourse about race in this campaign? Now, that's naïve. "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:53 PM:

" Girard, the blacks and swimming issue is not illegal to discuss in my social groups, nor is it something I would feel worried about discussing with any group--even groups of all minorities. I don't use it as a racial stereotype--it is a fact of inner city poverty and has nothing to do with race. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:51 PM:

" I submit that your jovial attitude about talk show hosts and what they may or may not do as a result of a 'Black' and a 'Hispanic' as candidates is in and of itself, racist, if the definition is to be applied equally.

How can one accuse another of racism when they practice an identical form of racism as an attack against it? Confusing? You bet it is; but think about it.

It wouldn’t be so confusing if we could all simply discuss it. But we aren’t there yet. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:46 PM:

" voter stated, 'Girard, I did not state that Hispanics "will do things that others won't do." Limbaugh stated that.'

I didn't state otherwise. Read my post closely. I asked you if that statement was racist. There is an ellipse before the quote to save words. I stand by the rest of my post.

The swimming example is raised simply to illustrate that it is somehow ‘illegal’ to even discuss the prospect; even if it discards it.

There are, however, certain things which are inherently racial. "

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:31 PM:

" voter, Pride was a great movie. "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:29 PM:

" Girard, you know that a number of radio talk show hosts would have a field day with two minorities running for the highest office. They play a ratings game--every single one of them--that's the only way they can stay on the air. Many of the talk show hosts would exploit the racist fears of a certain segment of the population for ratings sake. Would all of them do this? No. It would certainly interest me to see who would. "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:23 PM:

" Girard, I did not state that Hispanics "will do things that others won't do." Limbaugh stated that. I want to use one of your examples to explain my thinking--the blacks and swimming stereotype. It's very true that many inner city blacks do not like to swim. The racist view is that this is some manifestation of being black. Actually, it has more to do with inner city poverty and the culture of inner city poverty than race. Did you see the movie "Pride"? It was about scores of black competitive swimmers in Philadelphia. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 7:59 PM:

" voter stated, '..hispanics "will do things other people won't do."'

How is this racist? This is a sentiment advanced not only by our government, but by everyone who believes that illegal aliens should be granted immunity. If this is not true, then that argument ('arguably' a strong one in many folks' opinion not to deport 12 million people) is destroyed. What then?

Yeah, we've got a very, very long way to go before we're able to sit down and have a serious conversation on race and racial issues. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 7:45 PM:

" Voter - to be fair, I notice that you've 'qualified' your stance somewhat, e.g., ...what others in that race say, think, or feel IS "often" racist,' and '...The things that Mr. Limbaugh says are "inappropriate" in ANY context.'

Yet, as I've stated below, there are those who lay the blanket completely over groups of people as racist, often because they don't share the same political affiliation or ideology.

I'm not looking for 'fairness' here - I'm searching desperately for 'right' and 'wrong.' "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 7:41 PM:

" Here's a stupid example. Due to the majority of white people having fair skin, how fair/unfair is it to group every white person as being prone to sunburn and then joke about it; even when it is not entirely true of ALL white people?

When I lived in North Philadelphia (90% black), it was understood that most (black people) didn't like to swim. Now, that was not to mean that ALL black people didn't like to swim. Yet, it was a 'fact' as it existed there. To mention this 'fact' is now considered racism. Things are crazy!

I raise these absurd examples because I believe that most of the ‘racism’ being leveled back and forth is just that, absurd. Unless, of course, the ‘racism’ card is used to advance one political party over another – then it’s treated seriously by certain news outlets. All Republicans are racist. Liberals are unifying. Republicans-bad; Liberals-good. Is that not discrimination by itself.

The madness goes on and on.

Even here, the blanket statement about ‘talk show hosts’ and how they’re going to now respond to a black and Hispanic (actually, Mexican was stated) on the same ticket. Does no one see the hypocrisy in that? "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 7:33 PM:

" We're never going to be able to address racial issues unless we lose the 'fear' felt by even 'thinking' about racism.

My position with Obama has always been about his 'integrity' and his 'fitness to be the president.' I've never addressed Wright's words as racist, because I don't think they were. I believe some were un-American. It was based upon these beliefs that I question Obama's judgment.

Obama's not being candid about this entire episode goes to the heart of his 'integrity.'

Yet, it seems everything gets right back to 'race.' How can we have dialogue when we're not permitted to talk? "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 7:18 PM:

" Girard, I do not think repeating what a black person said is racist. I do think generalizing that one person's words as an example of what others in that race say, think, or feel IS often racist. "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 7:15 PM:

" Girard, regarding your 7:05 post--there is some truth to what you say. I think that is part of what Mr. Obama was attempting to address in his speech this week. We need a politician willing to talk about race in the context of real people and real issues--we need to come together and stop fearing each other. "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 7:11 PM:

" Girard, I'm not following the reasoning. First you seemed to take offense at those "screaming about taking Wright's comments in context" and then you say I need to essentially view Limbaugh's racist remarks in context--ie, how can he be a racist if he makes bigoted comments about all minorities, disabilities, sexual orientations? The things that Mr. Limbaugh says are inappropriate in ANY context. You are correct that people take him seriously, and this makes the remarks irresponsible. Would you get on the airwaves and say those things? I KNOW you wouldn't--not under any circumstances. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 7:05 PM:

" You know, I was just about to raise a different issue that I know not to be racist, yet I had to pause and erase my thought.

I'm no racist. Yet just the 'fear' of being labeled such is so great that there simply cannot be an intelligent discussion about it.

We haven't evolved very far, have we? Either a slip of the tongue or an innocent word or someone repeating, verbatim, what a black person may have said is branded racist because he/she is not black and not 'permitted' to say such a thing. We've got a long way to go. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 6:53 PM:

" Voter - while I appreciate the sentiment I know that this is a volatile issue.

On the issue of 'Halfrican American,' if one simply takes a step back, breathes deeply for a moment and then examines this clearly. What do we get from this?

Is this truly racist? It is true that Barack is 'half' black and 'half' white. There is no politically correct term to describe a person with such a heritage. Certainly we wouldn't want to refer to this aspect of the man by the old term, would we?

Limbaugh is a satirist- he doesn’t ‘discriminate’ against anyone. All are fair game in his humor. I suppose the problem with Limbaugh, in particular, is that many of his fans take what he says too seriously. I never have. In fact, as he began showing true signs of hypocrisy (unrelated to race, because I have yet to uncover any signs there) in his personal life, I moved away from listening to him.

There ARE racists among us and the majority of them are not as identifiable as we might like to believe. Their racism is much deeper and darker. Limbaugh is a clown – everything is right out in the open. "

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 6:41 PM:

" voter, I agree. On another LNS blog an idiot named tara posted websites on youtube calling Obama White Trash because his Mom is white.

By the logic of the clip, tara is just calling herself white trash, if her Mom is white.

I guess racism is alive and thriving. It is so sad and so pathetic. "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 6:36 PM:

" Girard, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt on Limbaugh. As you say you have issues with him, you probably don't listen to him often. The internet is full of clips of him spewing all sorts of racist cr@p. He's been calling Obama a "Halfrican American" and was giving odds on the Survivor TV series based on racial stereotypes--ie "blacks can't swim" and hispanics "will do things other people won't do." "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 6:12 PM:

" I never defended Rev. Wright, and even Mr. Obama made it clear that he felt the comments were inappropriate. Mr. Obama does not make those kinds of comments himself and has never given anyone reason to suspect he even THINKS those kinds of thoughts. We need to judge the candidates by their own words and deeds. You wouldn't want us judging you based on the remarks of talk radio show hosts you listen to repeatedly. Isn't that the charge thrown at Obama? "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 6:01 PM:

" I knew when I made that statement what the reaction would be. I also realized that there would be no reasonable dialogue possible.

Even while many scream about taking Wright's comments into 'context,' there is refusal by those same folks to apply that to anyone else.

While provocative and outlandish, songs like the one referred to here have only attempted to reveal the thoughts and actions of those who claim not to be racist; Sharpton, Biden and others.

I'm not a Limbaugh fan, having other issues with his character, but delving deeper the title of a song, he clearly is not racist. (IMHO) "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 4:32 PM:

" For a list of other radio talk show hosts spouting racist and/or sexist invective and exact quotes:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200704120010
"

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 4:31 PM:

" Geez, voter, I had to look that up. SIC song. "

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 4:27 PM:

" Nice blog, voter. "

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 4:26 PM:

" G, voter could be refering to Rush.

I can just hear him now. He may need to increase his oxycontin.

G, I used to love listening to Rush, many years ago. Then he went from wierd to really wierd. Or, maybe I grew up. "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 4:26 PM:

" Girard, obviously you missed Rush Limbaugh singing "Obama, the magic negro." Do I need to go further? "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 4:03 PM:

" voter stated, 'And what, pray tell, would talk radio have to say about a black man and a Mexican running the country?'

What do YOU think they would 'say?' I've listened to talk radio for years. Never, and I mean NEVER has race been the subject unless it was being discussed because it 'exists' (the existence of race) or to condemn racism. This notion that radio commentators are race-baiting, radical-right conservatives is nonsense. It simply is not true.

I won't suggest to those who believe this tripe to just listen to a broadcast because I know they won't listen. "

real facts wrote on Mar 22, 2008 4:01 PM:

" girard; who died and made you moderator?

butt out and mind your own business.

you have "transfered" other conversations into other blogs, so don't be a hypocrite "

T & C wrote on Mar 22, 2008 4:00 PM:

" I'm sorry but Neither democrat is for Border protection! The Economy and trying to stop or slow down Billions in illegal meth and cocaine and pot from Mexico, and millions of illegals is a priority as well the end to the Iraq war. No one can be serious about voting for Hillary, or Obama! McCain is no better. We are doomed when the presidency is decided! "

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 3:51 PM:

" Voter, I love his charisma. I heard him discribing himself.. "I have an American father , a Mexican Mother, and I look like an Indian." "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 3:40 PM:

" Sam, I LOVE that combo. Richardson lacks charisma, but he is extremely experienced and seems well respected. And what, pray tell, would talk radio have to say about a black man and a Mexican running the country? Makes me smile just to think about it. In reality, I do think they are a good match of skills and experience. "

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 3:21 PM:

" Voter, what do you think of Richardson as a vice presidential running for Obama?

You too, G, if you read this. I liked the chemistry of the two together. "

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 2:58 PM:

" Good to see you around, too, voter. I guess I should say good to "read" you around.

Glad to make you "smile". "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 2:53 PM:

" Sam, that comment was the brightest smile I've had all day. "

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 2:52 PM:

" and Bry, when did Obama say that God is black?

... and what is a typical white man church? "

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 2:50 PM:

" If God is not about race and gender, Bry, then how do you know God is a not a black woman? "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 2:40 PM:

" Bry, are you trying to say that Obama is not a Christian? "

Bry wrote on Mar 22, 2008 2:34 PM:

" According to Obama, Reverend Wright brought Obama to Jesus. But this obviously isn't the Jesus Christ of the Bible who was a Jew. As the Reverend Wright and Obama's Jesus is black and an African Jesus according to Reverend Wright. So they obviously deny the Holy Scriptures or work to distort the Bible. Race is so important to Obama and his Church unlike the "typical" white man church. Almightty God is not about race or gender. The God which America was founded upon is about humanity & the heart of man, not race & hate. "

nylodian wrote on Mar 22, 2008 1:58 PM:

" girard: Keep to the code, fellow High-Fiver! LOL! "

nylodian wrote on Mar 22, 2008 1:57 PM:

" Voter: I apologize that I rushed to judge... I wasn't aware of the Huckabee phrase (I didn't follow him much after he said he believed Creationism should be taught in public schools, etc.) For some reason I'm feeling a little defensive today, LOL.

My support for Obama waned a bit about a month ago when I felt (IMHO) there was a blatant bias against her by the media. We all form our opinions based on our perspectives, and vice versa. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 1:42 PM:

" I believe it should be noted that under normal circumstances, one's discussion in one 'blog' does not transfer to another, different 'blog.' There are those who somehow feel that response to another's posts (delivered as either statements or questions) is required. There is no such requirement here or on any other blog-site that I know of. "

real facts wrote on Mar 22, 2008 1:36 PM:

" sam, you didn't answer my question in the other blog......why not ??? "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 1:29 PM:

" Ny, I also know many supporters of Mrs. Clinton (close friends) to be highly educated. I wasn't labeling that group as WalMart shoppers. I believe that Obama is being unfairly attacked from both sides--normally those sides would be fighting each other tooth and nail, but here, the tactic seems to be mutually beneficial. "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 1:21 PM:

" NY, WalMart Republican is a term coined by Huckabee who proudly claimed to be "their guy." I've heard it used often since then by conservative talk show hosts. They called Romney the Wall Street Republican, in contrast. And then someone else came up with Costco Democrat to label another voting demographic. WalMart Republican is a label proudly used by a large block of people--I admit that I added "undereducated", a cheap shot, I apologize, but I do believe that demographic to be correctly self identified. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 1:10 PM:

" voter wrote, 'I don't see this revolt as an act of network integrity--just the opposite.'

Okay. I see this as an opportunity for a network to identify a problem, evaluate the problem and hopefully institute corrections if the problem is verified. I see this as an incredible place to work; the ability to stand up against something; keep your job; and perhaps be instrumental in instituting change? It can't be more American than that.

I'd like to see this happen at CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC or anywhere else. They're either too afraid, or they simply don't care. "

nylodian wrote on Mar 22, 2008 1:07 PM:

" Leonard: Obama has such a high regard for Bill Clinton that they put out a pic of him and Rev. Wright the other day. Wasn't that nice? "

nylodian wrote on Mar 22, 2008 1:06 PM:

" Voter: I look at many of the Hillary supporters I know here; funny, many are college professors or business owners, would never set foot in a Wal-Mart and are far from Republican. But if you must put out false stereotypes to bolster your views, feel free. Frankly, I think it's beneath you, Voter, based on your usual posts. "

nylodian wrote on Mar 22, 2008 1:02 PM:

" voter: re: " Leonard, while I agree completely that the Clinton camp is fanning the flames, I believe that lots of this garbage is part of the FOX NEWS campaign"

I've said this several times - the fact is, they have been talking about Wright for a year now, but some here have closed their minds, which is limits one from being truly informed.
"

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 1:00 PM:

" voter wrote, 'It frightens me that many citizens believe whatever they hear on these shows.'

Understandable. Yet it also frightens me that people would simply accept what a candidate states without investigating further. Clinton, Obama and McCain are vying for the most coveted position on the planet - and the most powerful. Those who cast their vote simply on the way someone speaks, looks or sings not only wastes their vote, but they may go a long way in handing over all this power to someone not qualified to handle it. That’s scary! "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 12:57 PM:

" Girard, I have no idea if there were repercussions at Fox from the anchor revolt. However, I think it goes without saying that at a "standard" news source, there would be no reason for someone to walk off set in a huff if they were just asked to relate factual news. I don't see this revolt as an act of network integrity--just the opposite. "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 12:50 PM:

" As a whole, I think broadcast news had done a horrible job of providing relevant, objective coverage of the candidates. It's clear that tossing out sensational sound bytes to keep viewers tuned in is the corporate goal. CNN is shameless in this regard, but it is FOX that actually wages misinformation campaigns (again, by Rupert Murdock's own admission). It frightens me that many citizens believe whatever they hear on these shows. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 12:43 PM:

" voter stated, 'FOX has gone so overboard on the Obama thing, that one of their own anchors (Brian Kilmeade) walked off the set in protest this week and even Chris Wallace became upset and said on-air, enough with the Obama bashing.'

I would think then that one would view such disagreements about their 'own' network with positive criticism about FoxNews. Surely, I would never expect this kind of dissention at conventional network or other cable-news stations.

A good question to ask is, did anything adverse happen (by FOX) to Kilmeade OR Wallace for their oppositional stances? Does this not indicate integrity? "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 12:37 PM:

" voter stated, 'That's not happening at FOX (or at any other network).'

By adding that one parenthetical, you've changed much of the 'flavor' of your previous post. While I still disagree (to a lesser extent now), I can now see that you have not limited the scope of your investigation to one news outlet. "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 12:37 PM:

" FOX has gone so overboard on the Obama thing, that one of their own anchors (Brian Kilmeade) walked off the set in protest this week and even Chris Wallace became upset and said on-air, enough with the Obama bashing. "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 12:33 PM:

" Girard, I agree, investigating the background and integrity of all the candidates is exactly what journalists should be doing for us. That's not happening at FOX (or at any other network). The majority of FOX airtime is filled with conservative opinion shows. Rupert Murdoch has gone on record as stating that he tries to sway public opinion. The easiest group to sway is the undereducated, lower income types who will not scrupulously check facts (as you often do). This group is often the most prejudiced, as well. It's easy to feed their fear. "

sam wrote on Mar 22, 2008 12:21 PM:

" Well said, Leonard. "

girard74 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 11:54 AM:

" voter wrote, 'this garbage is part of the FOX NEWS campaign to paint Obama as a "scary black man" in the eyes of its mostly undereducated, white WalMart-Republican audience.'

This is patently absurd. What, we're not supposed to investigate the integrity and background of ALL those desiring to become the President? Doing so labels one (individual, group, news outlet, etc.) as 'racist'?

Those who do not want to know all they can about the person entrusted with incredible power in order to make an informed decision are the 'undereducated.' And frankly, I don't judge people on where they shop. (IMHO) "

voter wrote on Mar 22, 2008 11:21 AM:

" Leonard, while I agree completely that the Clinton camp is fanning the flames, I believe that lots of this garbage is part of the FOX NEWS campaign to paint Obama as a "scary black man" in the eyes of its mostly undereducated, white WalMart-Republican audience. Certainly, that set would prefer Mrs. Clinton. "

Leonard wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:32 AM:

" This is classic Clintonian nonsense.

Lets attack Obama for responding to the viscous mudslinging of Clinton's attack dogs.

What a load of nonsense. "

Comments on this story are now closed.