Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy

Thanks for your lengthy response, Whomod.

It might surprise you that I actually agree with your responses on all three candidates for the most part. This was much less inflammatory and much more specific than much of what you've posted to the Hillary and Obama topics recently, among others.

Even where I disagreed with you in this post, you at least acknowledge that opinions vary on whether Obama or someone else is the best candidate. But whether or not I fully agree, your respectful (!) expression of your own perspective is far better received than your partisan gloating and taunts.


On the subject of Gore...

 Originally Posted By: Whomod
Al Gore said he invented the Internet is an outright lie that i still challenge. Attacks on his personal lifestyle in relation to his environmentalism, while I don't agree with them, are fair game I suppose. To me it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to carry out a schedule as demanding as his while riding a bicycle to remain 'pure' to his critics is unrealistic I think but there you are.


Al Gore also said on one photo op with farmers that he was raised on a farm. When in fact, he never lived on a farm and --like Hillary landing in Bosnia "under fire"-- manufactured a folksy image, to give himself middle-America voter-appeal. [/b]


In all honesty, this is the 1st time I've heard of that. It's of the stripe of Hillary's beer swigging and gun toting, Obama's bowling and Bush's brush clearing. Why do they do this crap? Obama answered this yesterday but really, he did not just go bowl on the fly either. And he was roundly criticized and ridiculed for it.


 Quote:
In fairness, maybe Gore only told his fake farmboy story once, and Hillary repeated hers a few times, unrepentantly. But the Hillary-"under fire" story got one hell of a lot more media-play, and I think that had to do with Obama support among the media reporting it, that wanted to crush her barely-surviving candidacy by disproportionately over-reporting it.


I have to disagree here as well. Just like the Bosnia story, since Friday night it's been wall-to-wall "bitter" talk on the cable outlets. Today being the 1st day after the weekend, it' just flared up to the point where I was sick of the word "bitter" being repeated ad naseum ALL DAY LONG. It's not so much favoritism I think as it is exploitation of slip-ups and smelling blood that the media thrives on with anyone.


 Quote:
The other point about "no legitimate media source" reports about Obama's hidden muslim past, ignores that the media is upwards of 80% liberal, and that Obama is their man, and they just don't want to report it.
But every mainstream conservative media source (FOX News, Newsmax, Wall Street Journal, Washington Times...) has reported it. I would say that the portion of the media that isn't partisanly liberal/pro-Obama, has reported this story regularly.


Well I side with David Brock on this one when he says that as a Republican attack dog, part of the strategy to substantially increase a right wing presence was to accuse the media of being liberal. I certainly see a more balanced mix now but just a few years ago, it was a running joke among liberals that most of the pundit shows would feature 3 conservatives repeating the Bush talking points against one liberal criticizing them and then being outshouted and attacked by the three.


 Quote:
And while you would like to say that these are "wild conspiracy theories that Obama is an al qaida Manchurian Candidate", I don't see that anyone has suggested that he's a secret agent of Al Qaida, but simply that he's been dishonest about his muslim beliefs and has (by the words quoted from his own autobiography and elsewhere) a hidden anti-white/anti-European/anti-American liberal agenda, that he has been dishonest about, as many of his sourced friends from grade school, high-school, college, and early career years are quoted, and many even from their online linked blog websites.


It'd be easier to take them seriously if since Obama emerged on the national scene, the right wing (and Clinton) strategy was first to exploit his middle name, then exploit the fact that lived in Indonesia, then exploit the fact that he once dressed in traditional African garb as part of a Congressional junket. All in an attempt to reinforce a whisper campaign and try to paint him as a Muslim. Not with any facts like you state. But with that. His middle name, his childhood school, and then an out of context photo.

First he was a closet Muslim, then he was a radical Baptist and now this week, he's a condescending atheist.

 Quote:
Whether you agree or like it, it is not sleazy to ask legitimate questions about what Obama truly believes, and contrast that with what Obama says, and often waffles or reverses himself on, in his speeches.


Legitimate questions are fine. An orchestrated indirect campaign to create an impression in peoples minds about Obama is quite another. He's already responded to these questions and the media for the most part are satisfied. Except for the right wing sources you cite there which frankly IMO I think are trying to create this impression no matter what Obama says or no matter that they and only they see anything there, there.

 Quote:
I have about equal admiration and disgust for Obama, Hillary and McCain at this point. Even though I agree with McCain more than the other two, you and others (including Ann Coulter and Pat Robertson) make legitimate points about McCain's being a bad representative of true Republicanism, and arguably not the sharpest pencil in the drawer, and I'm still deciding whether it would be better to let a Democrat take the blame for the next 4 years, rather than elect another Republican (like W. Bush is) that misrepresents what Republican conservatism is all about.


I think I brought that up as part of a response on Obama's patriotism. Why on Earth would someone who HATES America want the thankless job of the next few years. The economy, the military, our relations and reputation all lover the world, and I think the Government are in such sad shape that the next president pretty much has a mess on his hands. And it's a mess his/her opponents will seize and use against them no doubt. Even though it was a mess inherited. I'd almost like Obama to not get stuck in that mess. But then I think of Franklin Roosevelt. He inherited so much more and so much worse and he did legendary work despite the odds.

 Quote:
Of the three, at this point I think Hillary might be the fastest on her feet, the most moderate (by her Senate record), the most tenacious, and the most resourceful. She is a true politician, and while none of us are admirers of manipulative politicians, she might have more of what it takes to deal with domestic and global leaders than the other two candidates.


Well if you've been reading my posts, that's my problem with her. She's part of a a machine. I honestly and without exaggeration or malice cannot for the life of me see a real person there. It's all scripted, focus group tested, calculated political machinations. And that was revealed even when it came down to her flip one liners in debates. It was Mark Penn not Hilary Clinton. Even when Bill was talking candidly to the media. it wasn't Bill making the slyly veiled racial remarks. it was Mark Penn. Scripted, tested and released out of the mouth of the machine. It is fake. I don't get that feel from Obama. And I'd rather see the guy fumble around because of HIS OWN misstatements than to think that the missteps and gaffes and face saving as well as the successes are all being choreographed by the man behind the curtain.

 Quote:
At various points I've thought that McCain, Hillary, and even at points Obama, might be the best choice of the three. But the truth is, none of them is who I would have chosen, it's just down to the lesser of three evils now.

And my opinion on which is the lesser evil changes often, at this point.


That's how i felt pretty much up until the weekend of my state Primary. Then Clinton really started pissing me off. Like Richardson, I too thought Hilary was the best choice. Not my favourite but among the best of the remaining 2, even though I was for Edwards. Then Hillary started lying, dirty tricks started being played, Hillary started getting downright unlikable and thus started slipping and Obama stared ascending because for all her negatives, Obama had positives and actually inspired people. And then suddenly, Hillary started turning into a faux Republican with her attack ads, rhetoric, and fear mongering. Still, I was happy with my candidate, wished Obama luck and started eyeing Clinton more warily. Then even more shenanigans finally was one shenanigan and odd coincidence to much. And as I posted in that last link, I still was mulling Clinton over up to the 11th hour. Bill Clinton's dishonesty that final weekend before the primary crystallized everything and Obama looked so much better. his grass roots campaign and message of inspiration was a stark contrast to Hillary, who as I demonstrate over these links, just descended down a level that a growing number of people didn't want to follow.

I note that thru it all, MEM has remained a one note Hillary machine. No matter what she does or is linked to, she smells like a rose every time. And he still dares to speak ill of Obama supporters as being akin to cultists and the like?

This campaign was always Hillary's to lose. And lose it she did. In every sense of the word. Or maybe, as thedoctor and other suggest, this is the real Clinton's. Nothingmore than a ruthless pandering lying political machine.