Obama's 95% Illusion

[/dev/null]

Socialism is here, might just as well vote Obama, at least he is a believer!

Do you want some pie with your Kool-Aid®?

[Wacka]

Ah, okay.

 

 

 

lol, my boss has already threatened to move to Canada if Palin becomes VP.

 

Job opening for you!

[IDBillzFan]

How do you explain the exact same scenario that played out with Hillary, who for a full year leading up to AFTER the primary started, "had the media in the bag". He had a better team, ran a better campaign, raised more money, convinced more people, made better decisions, and won the battle. You and others that just say the media is in the bag for Obama simply ignore the history, that they weren't. They were in the bag for Hillary. It was only after Obama won in Iowa (and later won on Super Tuesday), thereby ENDING the race, that they were gushing over Obama.

 

And were they gushing over Gore and Kerry? Sorry, but the media didn't create the guy. He has political talent like Bill Clinton did. Like Bush had. Like Reagan had (and no, I am not comparing him to Ronald Reagan in any way other than to say he has a political ability and personality to inspire and convince people). If the media were to just create and promote someone who is an empty suit, it wouldn't be a black guy. If Obama were white, he'd probably be up by 25 points right now.

You're making my point for me better than I'm making it.

 

The media wants the left in the White House. They hitched their tails to Hillary, and it didn't work out, so they hitched their tails to Obama, which is easier to do when he's up against a knucklehead like McCain. So I stand corrected: the media isn't in the bag for Obama. They're in the bag for whomever is representing the left, and they will lift him to another stratosphere.

 

Here's a small case in point: yesterday, Tina Fey commented that if Palin wins, she would not be interested in portraying Palin for four years. She said "“We're gonna take it week by week. If she wins, I'm done,” Fey tells TV Guide in the Oct. 20 issue. “I can't do that for four years. And by ‘I'm done,’ I mean I'm leaving Earth." She then added "“Election time is always good for ('SNL,') and this is a bonkers election,” Fey said. “And that lady is a media star. She is a fascinating person. She's very likable. She's fun to play, and the two bits with Amy (Poehler) — that was super fun.”

 

MSNBC's Headline: "Tina Fey ‘leaving Earth’ if Palin wins."

 

In.

 

The.

 

Bag.

 

Without the media, and especially without a duck like McCain, only a select few Chicago business people and a handful of Kenyans are left thinking this well-spoken grip-n-grin socialist could possibly be an effective POTUS.

[KD in CA]

You don't see that BUSH and PALIN are basically the same?

 

I have a ton more respect for McCain... They really pulled one over on you Bill.

 

And yes... I am worked up because people are not better off than 8 years ago... This country has gone to hell in a handbasket the last 8.

 

 

but..but...I thought you had a secure job, no money in the stock market, and every other part of your life was insulated from all political evils!

 

nice to see you reduced to the Elliott/pBills level of mindless blather.

[Kelly the Dog]

You're making my point for me better than I'm making it.

 

The media wants the left in the White House. They hitched their tails to Hillary, and it didn't work out, so they hitched their tails to Obama, which is easier to do when he's up against a knucklehead like McCain. So I stand corrected: the media isn't in the bag for Obama. They're in the bag for whomever is representing the left, and they will lift him to another stratosphere.

 

Here's a small case in point: yesterday, Tina Fey commented that if Palin wins, she would not be interested in portraying Palin for four years. She said "“We're gonna take it week by week. If she wins, I'm done,” Fey tells TV Guide in the Oct. 20 issue. “I can't do that for four years. And by ‘I'm done,’ I mean I'm leaving Earth." She then added "“Election time is always good for ('SNL,') and this is a bonkers election,” Fey said. “And that lady is a media star. She is a fascinating person. She's very likable. She's fun to play, and the two bits with Amy (Poehler) — that was super fun.”

 

MSNBC's Headline: "Tina Fey ‘leaving Earth’ if Palin wins."

 

In.

 

The.

 

Bag.

 

Without the media, and especially without a duck like McCain, only a select few Chicago business people and a handful of Kenyans are left thinking this well-spoken grip-n-grin socialist could possibly be an effective POTUS.

You're basing this with an example on MSNBC of what Tina Fey said?

 

Little history lesson. The media loved George Bush in 2000. The media loved George Bush after 9/11. The media was in the bag for George Bush and the war in 2003. The media was not "in the bag" for Kerry or Gore, the lefties as you say, in the last two Presidential elections, and even if you believe they were, they LOST because they were terrible candidates. The media criticized them for making all kinds of mistakes, especially in the debates and on the campaign trail. This same liberal leaning media which I completely admit and always have is left leaning.

 

But you know why they weren't in the bag or criticized Kerry and Gore on the campaign trail and during the debates? Because they were terrible on the campaign trail and in the debates! They were HORRIBLE candidates who ran terrible campaigns and lost elections that they had zero business losing.

 

You know why both Gore and Kerry were horrible candidates, running terrible campaigns, who lost elections they had zero business losing?

 

Because they couldn't inspire people, they didn't raise the money, they gave terrible speeches, they surrounded themselves with losers making godawful decisions who ran terrible campaigns that generated little interest, they lost debates or did and said stupid things in them, they didn't take the high road but came across whiny, they weren't thoughtful, they were book smart but politically stupid, they totally lacked charisma, they didn't handle the pressure well or with grace, they couldn't get people to like them, and therefore they didn't get enough votes.

 

Oh, but the media just created Obama out of whole cloth.

[IDBillzFan]

Oh, but the media just created Obama out of whole cloth.

It's more of a gauze, but at least we agree on something.

 

For the record, I'm not arguing about the past. I'm arguing about the present. The media is in the bag for the left. They must have the left in power. They must. Because they've already picked the all the meat off the conservative bone and they're left sucking marrow at this point. Once they elevate the left to the highest level of power in the world, they will remind the world who really holds the power as they systematically raze the left about two years after they're in office. Suddenly, topics like Ayers, Rezko, Odinga, ACORN, etc. will be fair game. That's why the MSM doesn't bother asking those questions now. They need them later.

 

They build with weak twigs so they can easily destroy at their discretion. And they do this because that's what America craves. We love to see the weak fly high because the higher we all take them, the farther they have to fall. And that makes everyone feel better about themselves.

 

And who doesn't love the sound of a celebrity hitting the ground like a 100 pounds of wet laundry dropped from the 30th floor.

 

The media is lifting your candidate. The simple fact that he can more often than not complete a full sentence without using the word "aaaaaaand" all the time makes their job that much easier.

 

Here's a peak into the future. You've probably seen this article. It's actually a pretty stupid article, but it's written by a CBS correspondent covering the candidates. But his closing comments, I think, are a microcosm of what we'll see once your candidate is in office for a couple of years.

 

Maybe none of this means much. Maybe a front-running campaign like Obama's that is focused solely on victory doesn't have the time to do the mundane things like print up schedules or attend to the needs of reporters.

 

But in politics, everything that goes around comes around.

 

In other words; we have a long memory, Mr. Obama. Don't prod this bear.

[Da Big Man]

Question: In your opinion, Bluefire, does Obama have the best interests of the United States at heart, or does he have some personal agenda?

Personal agenda all the way!!! So by your school of thought , if Obama is elected then in days after oil will drop in price, taxes will go down ,troops will come home from Iraq and outsourcing will stop. NOT. He like, so many others, will say anything to get this Office.

[Kelly the Dog]

For the record, I'm not arguing about the past. I'm arguing about the present. The media is in the bag for the left. They must have the left in power. They must. Because they've already picked the all the meat off the conservative bone and they're left sucking marrow at this point.

Ah, so you're just going to ignore what just happened in the last 2-3 elections that contradict your point, and just count on something that hasn't happened yet to illustrate it? Of course, the media is in the bag against the right. The entire world is in the bag against the right. Half of the right is in the bag against the right. Give me one good reason why anyone, media or not, should NOT be in the bag against the right? The right has totally screwed up the last eight years. Granted, a significant amount of reasons worked against them, but are you really going to sit here and say that we should just ignore the past eight years that have been devastating on almost all levels and just give the right a mulligan because you like them and hate the left? The media shouldnt criticize the right for the last eight years, which is what this election is all about?

 

My point, which you have just ignored each and every exchange, and have just decided to Sarah Palin it by answering different questions you pose to yourself, is that even if the media is in the bag for the left, and Obama, which they are, it is mostly because of him not them. Otherwise, it would be in the bag for a different Democrat, particularly Hillary. You are giving no credit to Obama for doing anything but showing up, and not filling a nice looking suit, when all the facts and all the politicos and most all the pundits and a rather large majority of the population, is giving him a lot of credit on all kinds of big and small decisions, God-given talents and personality, and political shrewdness and savvy. According to you, he was just annointed and did nothing. And are completely ignoring the fact that other democrats and candidates had the exact same chance and blew it because they lacked all the big and small decisions, God-given talents and personality, and political savvy and shrewdness.

 

And yes, if Obama fails, of course the media will jump down his throat. Why shouldn't they? And they would and should whether he was built by them or not.

[Da Big Man]

The first thing he would do is raise taxes, and do it with that same smooth smile he uses when lying to the public...

[IDBillzFan]

Ah, so you're just going to ignore what just happened in the last 2-3 elections that contradict your point, and just count on something that hasn't happened yet to illustrate it? Of course, the media is in the bag against the right. The entire world is in the bag against the right. Half of the right is in the bag against the right. Give me one good reason why anyone, media or not, should NOT be in the bag against the right? The right has totally screwed up the last eight years. Granted, a significant amount of reasons worked against them, but are you really going to sit here and say that we should just ignore the past eight years that have been devastating on almost all levels and just give the right a mulligan because you like them and hate the left? The media shouldnt criticize the right for the last eight years, which is what this election is all about?

 

My point, which you have just ignored each and every exchange, and have just decided to Sarah Palin it by answering different questions you pose to yourself, is that even if the media is in the bag for the left, and Obama, which they are, it is mostly because of him not them. Otherwise, it would be in the bag for a different Democrat, particularly Hillary. You are giving no credit to Obama for doing anything but showing up, and not filling a nice looking suit, when all the facts and all the politicos and most all the pundits and a rather large majority of the population, is giving him a lot of credit on all kinds of big and small decisions, God-given talents and personality, and political shrewdness and savvy. According to you, he was just annointed and did nothing. And are completely ignoring the fact that other democrats and candidates had the exact same chance and blew it because they lacked all the big and small decisions, God-given talents and personality, and political savvy and shrewdness.

 

And yes, if Obama fails, of course the media will jump down his throat. Why shouldn't they? And they would and should whether he was built by them or not.

Look, the media and the left are given a golden egg: a bad economy in an election year. Giant headlines of the pending recession...nay, the pending depression. Fear, everyone! Fear! Panic! All brought to you, by default, by the current administration despite the fact that most anyone willing to look can see that the Democrats own a larger-than-life fault for the current economic mess. Surely even a hardcore leftie like yourself knows this to be true. It is completely undeniable...IF you're willing to look for it.

 

So the headlines scream "EVERYONE PANIC," and your candidate has to simply stand around looking pretty and saying "See? Republicans bad!!!" They completely teed it up for him. Completely.

 

I'll be willing to concede that your candidate's ability to lay low and let the bullets hit everyone else has helped him. But as I keep saying, and you keep suggesting that I'm ignoring, is that to me, without the media, Maobama doesn't have a chance in hell. The dude has consistently and repeatedly dodged the few tiny questions about his associations by either "denouncing" the people or making up a new excuse as he goes along. "I was eight when Ayers was doing bad things. I had no idea he was doing these things. No, wait, I did know, but I thought he was rehabilitated." How many times did he cite the wrong city when he was campaigning earlier? He didn't know where he was or who he was talking to half the time. That's a trademark Bush joke in the making, but Maobama? Nothing. And exactly what do you think the media would do with Sarah Palin if she suggested there are 57 states in the union?

 

Your dude would be toast if he were Republican because, as I said, all the smiles and grippin'-n-grinnin' in the world can not overcome the insane amount of times he has misspoken, or flat out lied. He is allowed to get away with it because he is the media's choice. He's not near the leader you've been told he is. Not even close.

 

He's shiny to you, but to the objective eye, he's completely and utterly full of shiit. And just to be fair, so is McCain. But this isn't about McCain. It's about your candidate getting away with every stupid thing he's said or done because the media permits it.

 

And make no mistake; your candidate will not need to fail for the media to jump on him. They will jump on him regardless of how he's doing because with the Democrats holding Congress, the Senate and the Presidency, there won't be anyone on the right to go after.

[drnykterstein]

This is a difficult question, mainly because I don't think its an either-or answer.

 

He definitely has his own desire to be President above anything else (pretty much required to get the job), but I'm sure he also believes he'll do a good job and is better for the country than mccain.

 

Fair enough.

 

Would it help anything to know, he really had to be talked into running?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,235840,00.html

 

The petition mentioned 1/2 way down.. I signed it . He's changed a bit since that day, but I hope when campaignning is over, he'll return to the mind set he had back then. The one that did make him to say "This is an office you can't run for just on the basis of ambition"

[StupidNation]

Kelly,

 

I've never in my life thought the media could be more biased for one candidate in my life. I thought Bill got more leeway than I thought possible, and even Hillary was given a past on a lot before the media discovered their love of Obama. Once it was Obama vs. Hillary it wasn't a contest.

 

I can honestly say that one could not have more red-flags in their background from Ayers, to Wright, and still no one really cares and allows him to dismiss such affiliations with outright lies and then commentators rushing from all sides to defend him. I mean it's it strange when you go to yahoo main page and whenever they discuss an Obama McCain issue you always see the thumbnail pic of Obama?

 

I agree with LA on everything, including the fact that McCain is not running a good campaign, nor he is a good candidate. I also agree with you that Obama is articulate, intelligent, and wins people over. I think he's the 2nd most charismatic candidate I've ever seen.

 

All in all I think that Obama's victory is secure no matter what and his rise is a sad commentary on American politics.

[Kelly the Dog]

Kelly,

 

I've never in my life thought the media could be more biased for one candidate in my life. I thought Bill got more leeway than I thought possible, and even Hillary was given a past on a lot before the media discovered their love of Obama. Once it was Obama vs. Hillary it wasn't a contest.

 

I can honestly say that one could not have more red-flags in their background from Ayers, to Wright, and still no one really cares and allows him to dismiss such affiliations with outright lies and then commentators rushing from all sides to defend him. I mean it's it strange when you go to yahoo main page and whenever they discuss an Obama McCain issue you always see the thumbnail pic of Obama?

 

I agree with LA on everything, including the fact that McCain is not running a good campaign, nor he is a good candidate. I also agree with you that Obama is articulate, intelligent, and wins people over. I think he's the 2nd most charismatic candidate I've ever seen.

 

All in all I think that Obama's victory is secure no matter what and his rise is a sad commentary on American politics.

Name one lie that Obama has told about Ayers or Wright.

[drnykterstein]

StupidNation - If one candidate is actually superior, I mean clearly better.. why would not news coverage speaker better of him?

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

Yep, I agree the Ayers and Wright stuff is all about trying to Willie Horton Obama. McCain has some pretty bad associations too, but I don't see the media jumping on them. What about the Keating 5, what about Jack Abramson, what about McCain's Oil connections and campaign contributions, in fact both sides campaign backers and their special interests have largely been ignored by the media. The reason that Republicans are crying that the media is ignoring the Ayers and Wright stuff is mostly because it is past news and is so blatantly political.

 

However, on the economic argument, Obama has left the door open for a courageous proposal from McCain and if he can show a modicum of intelligence on the economy and put an end to his campaign's snarling useless attacks, he might get voters to listen to his message. But right now all you hear out of them is growl, snap Obama bad, hysterical white mobs decrying he is not one of us. That isn't McCain, but he has let his folks get away with it to the point that it is hurting him.

 

He needs to put a muzzle on Palin and send some penicillin to the true believers in order to get the middle's votes. Obama is vulnerable on the economy because of his choice of words as in today where is said he wanted to spread the wealth. That terminology is already being effectively interpreted by Republicans to their advantage, whatever Obama meant.

[ExiledInIllinois]

but..but...I thought you had a secure job, no money in the stock market, and every other part of your life was insulated from all political evils!

 

nice to see you reduced to the Elliott/pBills level of mindless blather.

 

It isn't about me personally, I think that is what the conservatives don't understand... I am not worried about me, I am fine... I want everybody else to have the same leg up.

 

You can get worked up because other people have it rough... Even if I am making easy money and have it good... The big picture is that many not as lucky as myself are worse of as a whole.

[Boomer860]

It isn't about me personally, I think that is what the conservatives don't understand... I am not worried about me, I am fine... I want everybody else to have the same leg up.

 

You can get worked up because other people have it rough... Even if I am making easy money and have it good... The big picture is that many not as lucky as myself are worse of as a whole.

It wasnt luck you have what you have it was hard work. Individual responsibility is where its at. Communism does not work , it is a dream even Lenin admitted that before he died.

[drnykterstein]

The reason that Republicans are crying that the media is ignoring the Ayers and Wright stuff is mostly because it is past news

 

We need a 24 hour Ayers & Obama news network. They could talk about all Ayers, all the time.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

P.S. Spreading the wealth isn't such a bad thing depending how it is done. Republicans think it should be done voluntarily which is a farce because it never happens at the level it needs to and those that have the least give the most. Rich people don't give, maybe why they became rich, but that is not the point.

 

Greed is good to a point until it becomes bad and then everything falls apart.

Spreading a little cheer keeps all the wheels running well... There has to be a middle ground where the wealthy either give back more or through taxation are required to. The problem then becomes if you tax them too much then it too becomes bad economically. Balance folks, something neither the right, nor the left seem to get. But the true believers don't need to eat, they live off their own adrenaline. For the rest of us schmucks either way, however it gets done, lay off the rw/lw kool aid and find some common ground, we will all be better off.

[Boomer860]

We need a 24 hour Ayers & Obama news network. They could talk about all Ayers, all the time.

Correct , but their views have not. "Show me your friends and I will tell you who you are"