Hillary Cries Foul in Media Bias

Hillary Clinton cries: MEDIA BIAS in favor of Obama. How very true but how very late she is to bring this to the forefront! The damage from slanted media coverage in favor of Obama has already been done. People have already drank his pleasant sounding, but poisonous Koolaid. Largely due to the absence of criticism in the media against Obama, he is always managing to come up smelling like roses. And the New York Times is one of the biggest offenders. This article entitled McCain Criticizes Obama on Al Qaeda really ends up being the other way around: Obama criticizing McCain and getting the ‘last word’ in the article. This is what I am seeing so much of: the ‘last word trick’. Even when the article bears a criticism of Obama, he manages to get the last paragraph in a positive tone. Media bias indeed and shame on the MSM!

Clinton accuses media of pro-Obama bias at debate

Barack Obama has no Accomplishments and Watson Proves it!

State Senator Kirk Watson of Texas proved a favorite talking point of mine: that Barack Obama has no significant accomplishments to prove that he can lead this country. He was grilled on MSNBC and choked really bad when asked point blank:

Well, name some of his legislative accomplishments. No, Senator, I want you to name some of Barack Obama’s legislative accomplishments tonight if you can.

The response was a bumbling cover up of the fact that he couldn’t think of a thing! Read it at Ed Morrissey and weep you Bammites!

Even more pathetic was Kirk Watson’s attempt at reconciling his bumble. He uses the old “mind went blank” excuse and procedes to list off a few of Obama’s perceived accomplishments. Even the ones he listed are vague ones at that. It’s kind of like the kid that flunks the test and goes to look up the answers later. Then he gives them to the teacher long after the test is over. Doesn’t count SON!

New York Times Gets Egg on Face Again

With the McCain story, once again we see what a sleazy news reporting agency the New York Times has turned into. The so called affair with lobbyist Vicki Iseman is not based on any fact, but hearsay. The New York Times based their whole story on the fact that “top advisors” in the McCain campaign were convinced that there was some romantic thing going on. No proof. No hard facts. Just gossip. The New York Times might as well report news from the office water cooler. They’re starting to look like the National Enquirer and have just about as much credibility.

Who’s Worse – Barack or Michelle?

After some speech material by Michelle Obama has been surfacing, I don’t know who I dislike worse – Barack or his wife? At least Barack knows how to give speeches, even if they are overflowing with BS. Michelle on the other hand seem to portray a darker, socialist side – the side we already know is there with Obama because of his communist ties.

You can read some of the transcript of Michelle from recent speech at Ed Morrissey along with his stinging opins. While Barack Obama comes across as caring and thoughtful, Michelle Obama comes across as high, mighty and preachy. Talking about ‘fixing our souls’ and other dribble. Here is a taste:

In 2008, we are still a nation that is too divided. We live in isolation, and because of that isolation, we fear one another. We don’t know our neighbors, we don’t talk, we believe our pain is our own. We don’t realize that the struggles and challenges of all of us are the same. We are too isolated. And we are still a nation that is still too cynical. We look at it as “them” and “they” as opposed to “us”. We don’t engage because we are still too cynical.

This is what I have really come to dislike the most about liberals. Their notion that somewhere, there is this perfect universe waiting in the wings where we can all ‘just get along’. And they attempt to mandate this notion through things like forced diversity. Sidenote: I am not necessarily against diversity, but I am opposed to the forcing of it by government.

So Michelle, why can’t we all just get along? Who knows, but the fact is, we can’t. Since the beginning of recorded history, there have been divisions within humanity. What makes liberals think they can wave some magic wand called ‘hope’ and change what is really basic human nature? And embedded in Michelle’s liberal speak is this notion that strips away individuality in favor of some liberal borg collective.

This is why I dislike the Obamas – they’re just too far left. It has nothing do with their color or their name, it’s the direction I can visualize with Obama leading this country that bothers me. That Obama Koolaid just doesn’t look very tasty to me!

Barack Obama’s Communist Ties

Well here’s something you won’t read in the mainstream media. Here’s a present for Hillary or McCain to beat Bammy up with if they want to go there. Of course Hillary is already so socialist that she couldn’t throw too many stones. Barack Obama has long been suspected of being a communist, now he has connections to show it! Communist you say? Oh that’s so mid 20th century. Sorry folks, it’s alive and well; hiding under another name: Barack Obama.

Obama’s socialist backing goes back at least to 1996, when he received the endorsement of the Chicago branch of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) for an Illinois state senate seat. Later, the Chicago DSA newsletter reported that Obama, as a state senator, showed up to eulogize Saul Mendelson, one of the “champions” of “Chicago’s democratic left” and a long-time socialist activist. Obama’s stint as a “community organizer” in Chicago has gotten some attention, but his relationship with the DSA socialists, who groomed and backed him, has been generally ignored.

Ignored? No,you don’t say! This article from AIM goes to further expose the socialist Washington Post. Worth a read! In the meantime, Mr. Mainstream Media continues to ignore any part of Barack Obama that doesn’t favor him. And the OBama fans keep drinking the communist koolaid. It may taste good now, but it will have a nasty after effect.

Obama’s International Socialist Connections

Funky McCain Delegate Math

From the LA Times:

Romney won about 280 delegates who will now be urged to back McCain, who began the day with 843 delegates. Huckabee had 242 delegates and Texas Rep. Ron Paul had 14. The Romney delegates would be enough to put McCain past the 1,191 delegates needed for the GOP nomination. Romney urged his delegates to back McCain, though each delegate will make his or her own decision.

843 + 280 does not equal or exceed 1191. It comes close at 1123. Does someone need to work on their math or is there something I am not seeing here? Something is not being reported. They must be assuming he in the process of getting other non committed delegates.

Romney endorses McCain

Conspicuously Missing – Negative Press on Obama

I should make this a contest but unfortunately due to the failed policy of the current administration, I can’t afford to pay a prize. Or I could make it a “missing” notice but I can’t offer a reward. Well ok, let me throw it out anyway. Can anyone find me a piece of negative press on Barack Obama? I am talking Mainstream Media (MSM) here. I know I can find that at Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh’s sites, or other conservative sites. But what about ordinary discourse from the MSM that doesn’t come out making Obama look so good?

Here is a typical MSM story entitled Bill Clinton knocks Obama on health care. Sounds like it might a criticism of Obama? Nope! Comes out sounding like Clinton is just blowing smoke (which he probably is, but that’s not the point). Where’s the criticism? Where the fair treatment of Obama in the media? And fair treatment doesn’t mean giving him a free ride. It means taking good hard look at his lack of experience, his no-shows in the senate, his absenteeism, and what the heck, maybe his smoking habit to boot? Can anyone say for sure he’s quit smoking when he’s still addicted to nicotine? Ah well, I’ll keep scouring the news.

McCain’s Age and his Veep

Ronald Reagan presently holds the record for being the oldest president upon taking office. He was just a few weeks short of his 70th birthday on January 20, 1981. That record could be shot down if McCain were to go on to be president. With a DOB of 8/29/36, McCain will be 72 next January – the month he would take office.

Sugar coat it any way you want but he’s old. Old as the hills, old as dirt, oldie olson, etc. Let’s face it, at that age, he can die any time. That makes the choice of VP all the more important. McCain’s VP will need to be ready to step in handily and steadily if McCain’s time is up during his term. McCain has not dropped any names but AZ Central drew up this composite of the choice:

• Come from outside of Washington and probably be a governor. That would offset McCain’s 25 years as a senator and congressman on Capitol Hill and his lack of executive-branch experience.
• Be more conservative than McCain, who faces ongoing criticism from the political right for his past cooperation with Democrats on issues such as immigration reform and campaign-finance law. Someone on good terms with the evangelical Christian community might help, too.
• The candidate probably will hail from the East, more likely the South.
• The candidate likely will be younger than McCain, who will turn 72 in August.

Hmm. That sounds like Huckabee. Huckabee is still in the race and people are wondering why. Perhaps he’s trying to set himself up for a VP spot and then pop in as president if and when the old man dies? Interesting scenario. The last time a president died in office (of something other than assasination) is 1945 (Roosevelt in his 4th term).

Getting back to Reagan, I am old enough to remember his 2nd term and it wasn’t a pretty sight. There was some evidence that Alzheimers was already setting in during that term. Had YouTube been around in those days, you would have seen videos of him stumbling and forgetting lines in speeches. A 2nd term for McCain would be even more of an Oldie Olson affair. Just sayin.

Who will be McCain’s VP choice

Barack Obama – The Audacity of Charisma

Let me just say that I would not vote for Barack Obama. Let’s get that out of the way right now so you know where I stand. It has nothing to with his color, his Muslim sounding name, or that he came from a broken family. Those things WILL make a difference to some people I can guarantee that, but I will not go there.

What it has to do with is primarily two things.

1 – He has no real leadership experience. I don’t consider a senator to be a leadership position. Senators are ‘team members’, they are not leaders. Even the whips and majority leaders are not leaders in the context of the skills required to be president. Before he was a senator, he was an attorney. Again, not a true leadership position. A leadership position would be a state governor, a mayor of a large city, or a CEO of a very large corporation perhaps. He has none of those things on his resume. Oh yeah, and he’s an author too. Not a leader.

2 – Related to no real leadership experience is the lack of accomplishments in area of leadership. His sheeple will often point to the bills he authored in the senate. Ok, but again, that’s the senate. He wrote two books? That’s an accomplishment, granted, but how would that help the U.S. as president? He could write kick ass letters and speeches I suppose.

The one thing Barack Obama does have in abundance is charisma. Not just ordinary charisma, but the kind of charisma that rallies up large number of people and gets them excited. So think about that for a minute. All these sheeple that follow Obama are doing so largely on the basis of his charisma?

That’s dangerous. Wake up sheeple!