Thinking Right

By Copyleft

February 27, 2008 8:27 AM | Link to this

The media report on who’s winning… and AMERICA prefers Obama.

By Mid-South Philosopher

February 27, 2008 8:30 AM | Link to this

Good morning, Jim,

I find it amusing that the Clintons, who were long the pets of the mainstream media, are now usurped by the “Star of Hawaii, via Illinois”!

Of course the media prefer Obama. They realize that barring a nuclear attack on the United States by an Islamist fanatic prior to November 11, Obama will go through John McCain like crap through a goose.

The religious right and those ultra- conservatives (Cunningham, Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter, Savage, etc) are hell bent upon degrading McCain unless he embraces their reactionary positions. Any sense of political compromise, the element that has caused the United State to endure for over 230 years, is alien to these fanatics, and they would rather see Obama or even Clinton in office than another counterfeit conservative, like Georgie Bush.

Hillary must win in Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Otherwise, we will have a first lady who only lately has come to be “proud” of her country. What a pity.

By Dennis

February 27, 2008 8:40 AM | Link to this

If you want to really know what’s going on, forget mainstream television and the usual radio talk shows.

I’ve found the following internet blogs to be informative and honest;

Talking Points Memo, which broke the story of political fixes at the Department of Justice. This site also has links to a number of other really good blogs.

Steve Clemons of the Washington Note, Juan Cole, who grew up in the Middle East and speaks the language.

Talking Points Memo also has links to other good sites.

Regading last nights Clinton/Obama show, host Tim Russert really made an a….s of himself continuing to pump Obama about Farrakahn.

You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

By Realist

February 27, 2008 8:42 AM | Link to this

Obama stands a very good chance of having his star burn out at some point before Nov 11. We have seen it before. The political winds can be fickle…dont write Hillary out of this thing just yet.

And speaking as a far right wing conservative, I beleive that four years of Barack Hussein Obama would do more harm to the safety, economy and well being of this nation that Bush Jr. ever did.

Does Obama get the kid glove treatment by the media? Of course he does. Because he is the most liberal senator on record. He is mainstream media’s dream candidate. Also, as MSP mentioned, most beleive McCain can easily defeat Hillary, Obama not as easily. And the left want to beat the GOP more than anything else they can think of. They would get behind and support satan himself if they thought he could defeat the GOP. And they may be doing just that.

By jbmlaw

February 27, 2008 8:57 AM | Link to this

Good morning all. With a minor clarification – that “media” means the traditional seven sisters (NYT, W Post, NBC, ABC, CBS, AP, and the defunct UPI now supplanted by Reuters) – the answer is “yes.” Our sage suggests the observation without explanation. I suspect that the “explanation” is where today’s activity will be on the blog. The jbmlaw reasoning, that Osama/Obama has been the beneficiary of Medea’s tender embrace, is offered by the noted philosopher Mel Brooks: “the dances [Barack does] are daring and new.”

I don’t think any of our leftist friends will insult our intelligence by suggesting there will ever be a shred of a possibility that the media will ever fawn over a conservative, not even the second coming of Reagan. After all, these are journalism majors, not an economics class among them. Thus the footsy-playing ground exists only on the left. The Hildebeest was too shrill, Joe Biden talks too much, Bill Richardson was a bit loopy and from a small state, Chris Dodd was a boring policy wonk, and they have all been around since the beginning of time. But Barack – he’s “articulate” (meaning he does not sound like Jesse Jackson), he’s “clean” (meaning he lacks the Clintonesque stench), he’s Harvard (meaning he has a right to be an overlord), and in the collective consciousness of the public he is a blank slate (meaning every voter can look at him and project his own policy wishes onto the Midwest persona.) No wonder the soccer moms swoon at his rallies. He’s from Illinois, and he’s from Hawaii, he’s Muslim and Christian and none of the above. And most of all, he has African ancestry without all of the American-slavery baggage. And as we all know, his actual record has no relevance in electing an overlord, we are only concerned with who he is (or as Southern red-neck democrats used to ask, “Who is his daddy?” except that is an uncomfortable question in the instant case.)

By Redneck Convert

February 27, 2008 8:57 AM | Link to this

Well, I had my back turned and earplugs in during the debate last night, like I always do when there’s something on I don’t agree with. I only watch and listen when its on Fox News because its Fair and Balanced.

But the missus watched and she says this librul Brian Williams and the other librul Tim Russert asked the Hillary woman all the hard questions. Like how come she said nice things about NAFTA so many times before and now says she’s against it. Its not fair to bring up a politicans words and use them against her. They had this stack of stuff to read that she’s said and the missus says they didn’t have no stack of stuff to use against Osama. And the missus says butter wouldn’t melt in their mouths when they asked questions of this Osama. Like he might get his feelings hurt if they got tough against him.

The missus says they kept throwing up the vote for the war against her, about the only thing she done right. Says she was like the one-legged man at the butt-kicking party. She couldn’t hardly make any points for having to defend herself against her own words and actions. No sooner would she get rolling than they would ask her another hard question and she would be body slammed again like Ric Flair use to do. Maybe there ought to be a rule against using a politicans words of the past in a debate.

After I heard the missus out I was almost sorry I didn’t watch or listen to the debate. Though it would of been like watching your wife’s mother drive off of the cliff in your new Ford F-350 with the chrome wheels. I would of liked to see her get nailed, because as a good Republican I hate her, but not by one of Those People like this Osama. I pray to God I’m not shamed by having one of Those People get named, but it sure looks like it is going to happen. And all because of the librul press people. They hate us godly Republicans and they even hate some Democrats.

What I want to know is when there will be another debate between the librul McCain and the Rev. Huckabee. I would watch the Rev. Huckabee tear McCain a new one, and I wouldn’t even use earplugs. I bet the good Rev. would even have pictures of McCain leaving a hotel room with that lobby woman. The old Sinful lecher.

Have a good day everybody.

By Glenn

February 27, 2008 8:59 AM | Link to this

Zzzzzzzzzzz

By Ron

February 27, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this

Good morning Jim,Even Fox news seems to mention Obama more than Clinton.I believe the media is a little slanted Obama’s way.Most of them would definitely prefer to see him win.Dennis makes the point of Russert making an a* of himself,but to be fair,what else can you make out of Russert?

By Allah says Dump A BUCKET OF PIG BLOOD ON DUSTY AKA JMBLAW

February 27, 2008 9:22 AM | Link to this

One thing Hillary and Obama have to keep in mind is that Farakahn and his followers are also citizens of America, and are entitled to their opinion just as jews and the pro israel lobby are also citizens of America and entitled to their opinion. This fanatical condemnation of our fellow citizens over their opinion regarding a foreign power that is benefiting from tens of billions of American tax dollars each and every year is not in keeping with our Democracy and its basic priciples…Let their voices be heard, let people make their OWN decisions about their message, without first instilling fear in the public that the Pro Israel Lobby and the American Jewish community will label you antisemitic…Israel is a foreign country and should rightfully take its place behind each and every american when it comes to handing out tax dollars and getting its message heard.

By Dennis

February 27, 2008 9:25 AM | Link to this

I don’t have to be an ignorant twit to keep using the same tired line, just a democratic moonbat to not.

I don’t have to be an ignorant twit to keep using the same tired line, just a democratic moonbat to not.

I don’t have to be an ignorant twit to keep using the same tired line, just a democratic moonbat to not.

By Allah says Dump A BUCKET OF PIG BLOOD ON DUSTY AKA JMBLAW

February 27, 2008 9:27 AM | Link to this

This debate was a disaster for Hillary: it reminded men of all the meetings at work where a big mouthed woman tried to take credit for everything that was working right, while blaming the men for everything that was not working right. Barak presented himself as cool, calm, and reflective…very Presidential. Hillary was practically hysterical on every issue, with an inability to put issues into perspective with respect to each other. Her harping on small differences in health care plans was very telling: the dollar is at an all time low, oil, gold and wheat are at all time highs, yet Hillary is fixated on health care…Hillary does not have the Right Stuff to be president. Barak clearly is the person I would want to be in charge if it came to a military crisis in Kosovo or Iran…He could put these two foreign military enganglements into perspective…that is are we willing to destroy our country to impose our will on these two third world countries? I for one am not, and neither should any thinking American. Sure, we have wasted hundreds of thousands of American lifes thru death and maiming from Korea to Viet Nam to Iraq imposing our will, but the price is too high for the return on investment. Hillary would react to a crisis in Kosovo with an emotional rampage, and just maybe get us into a nuclear exchange before her psychotic personality calmed down. Barak would not, he would coolly assess the situation, call the oppossing parties, and our so called enemies and friends, and make a good collective decision. That was my take on last night’s debate, Barak was Presidential, Hillary was NOT.

By BS Aplenty

February 27, 2008 9:33 AM | Link to this

It is certainly high irony that Obama is out-Clintoning Hillary with the media. Hillary’s behaving like the quintessential liberal spoiled child - why doesn’t the media love me anymore, why did you ask me the first question, bwa, bwa, bwa,…(mute volume). Yeah, Hill, that’s the kind of mental toughness a President will need. Try that when the Russians move troops toward Serbia.

Two light-weight Socialists in a cat fight - now that’s must-see TV.

By Aquagirl

February 27, 2008 9:39 AM | Link to this

Wow, Jim, what a softball…of course the media prefers Obama. He’s charismatic, the media are human just like the rest of us. He’s great on camera, and he’s new, unlike Hillary, who seems to have been in the media spotlight since the telegraph was invented. She’s pretty boring in comparison.

What’s surprising is the total unabashed nature of the bias, but then I suppose it’s normal for today’s media. What used to be “opinion” is now “news”. The Bill O’Reilly’s get the big ratings, journalistic neutrality is the kiss of death for anyone trying to stay alive in the media.

By Severed Ties

February 27, 2008 9:44 AM | Link to this

The voters dont watch tv 24/7. Hillary/Obama. Obama/Hillary. The shadow of the Hillary/Obama platform gets distributed randomly and evenly across the grassroots like a sundial. That’s the law of chaos, quantum physics, and the irony of this television fact: the less times you see a sit-com the more likely it is that you will see the same episode when you do finally watch it again.

Thus, Hillary blew her last chance last night to address the issues in that moving, feminine, reflective, personal tone that propelled her come-from-her-fat-behind victory in New Hampshire. (was it NH? see, it’s all forgotten now. she blew it folks.)

I dont know who is writing for her, but it may as well be the Obama campaign. What a fool Hillary is to have allowed confidants, who only rose to prominence by back stabbing, hacking, networking, and corruption, to steer her campaign into the lane of lame excuses, petty bickering, and unnecessary waffling.

If only she had found me last fall, when I emailed her websight many times volunteering my assistance. I even sent sample slogans, approaches, tactics and platform language. Oh, they hacked some of it, but what they didn’t know is that I always put a poison pill in my material, and unless you know how to follow it up, you’ll choke, oh trust me momma, you gonna choke.

Hillary: That is no way for you to become president. At most, you will only succeed in being a shrew.

Vote Obama 08! We’ve got a country to save, and a world to convince.

By Dennis

February 27, 2008 9:45 AM | Link to this

By Realist February 27, 2008 8:42 AM “Obama stands a very good chance of having his star burn out at some point before Nov 11. We have seen it before. The political winds can be fickle…dont write Hillary out of this thing just yet.”

“We have seen it before.” And while it could be Obama’s star to descend, the star could also descend on Hillary.

And I’ve wondered just who, then, whether Democrat or Republican, is waiting in the wings for the possibility of a grand entrance?

You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

By Mearah Myers

February 27, 2008 9:51 AM | Link to this

IF ALL QUESTIONS WAS ADDRESSED TO OBAMA FIRST, THEN CLINTON WOULD STILL ADDRESS THE ISSUE AS TO “WHY AM I THE LAST TO REPLY..DON’T YOU THINK?

By Mike

February 27, 2008 9:57 AM | Link to this

Does the media prefer Obama? If the media were the electoral college, he would already be President. He’s the savior of the United States. Haven’t you read that yet? (please note sarcasm there)

Obama is definitely the media darling, at the moment. I think Clinton has pretty much stepped in it one too many times. Besides, the big stars are now backing him, so they will make sure he stays the media darling.

I just can’t wait until he starts getting asked real substantive questions preparing for November. Hopefully, the people of the U.S. will listen to what he really has to say (or should I say what he really has to NOT say).

By Severed Ties

February 27, 2008 10:11 AM | Link to this

Obama is drawing the huge crowds. Every appearance is an historical event. He’s become famous for being famous. he’s becoming president for being presidential.

The media would have to ignore the gigantic assemblies of americans who flock to his speeches to be “fair” to Hillary, but that’s like saying it’s not fair that Bush was appointed president by the supreme court and never really elected in 2000 and that’s why the country is in the reactive mess it’s in and why a black man can now be president…..oh yeah….bad example, but you know what I mean.

Who wants to hear Hillary say anything? Oh, maybe 38% of the democratic voters. The landslide is clearly Obama’s.

McCain tripped badly on the New York Times story, and then on the heals of his soft-spoken, slow-delivered, blinking-eyed denial, come the Cincinnati shock jock’s embarrassing bullying of obama. McCain lost a lot of credibility when he responded in the same low keyed non-denial/denial way.

McCain has all the charisma and energy of an overdigested oatmeal flow, but it’s great he’s getting enough fiber.

Vote Obama, people.

By Jim's a Cherry Picker

February 27, 2008 10:12 AM | Link to this

Hi Jim,

Seems like a media pro like yourself could bottom line this:

The media prefer who we prefer. The media are capitalist ventures out to make revenue by selling ad dollars. Topical coverage spikes (news) or general entertainment trends (tv/reality) reflect their sense of what the consumer demand is at that time…a sense that is backed up by hard research into viewership trends and preferences (they aren’t exactly guessing).

Otherwise, how could they make money?

Hillary, like most things that are old news, just don’t think that it’s fair. But that’s capitalism, now isn’t it?

Sorry to have to show you up like this.

By Carl Rove

February 27, 2008 10:16 AM | Link to this

Barrack Hussein Obama will be the next president. I have tried but failed to stop this political tsunami. Nothing I can say or do can turn back this guy. The coming election will be almost totally revolve around domestic issues and we republicans are virtually helpless. We will lose and lose big. My tactics over the last 7 years have not served the party well and the American public has caught on to the fact that we as a party do not give a damn about the concerns of the everyday going to work guy. I apologize to my fellow conservatives. I am responsible for your next president being Barrack Hussein Obama.

By Victor Kulkosky

February 27, 2008 10:19 AM | Link to this

Yes, the media (by which I assume you primarily mean political reporters) does prefer Obama. Reporters haven’t liked Hillary from the day she and Bill hit the national scene, so the preference isn’t new to Obama. Journalistically, there are a lot of interesting things about Obama that make him good copy, but that shouldn’t create bias, which is quite apparent.

But this isn’t just a liberal likes liberal thing. The media have liked McCain at least since the Straight Talk Express. The media never liked Giuliani, going back to his mayoral days, even though he’s more liberal than McCain. The feeling was mutual.

It’s obvious to intelligent observers, but not to the media, that the political press plays favorites, which does great damage to all the pieties about objectivity.

By Mike

February 27, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this

OK, I’ve read a few of these, and I have actually seen comments that Obama will be strong with the military and protecting this country. Those are just about the most naive comments I have ever heard. He has already stated that he will have all our troops out of Iraq in 2009. So Russia on the border of Kosovo? Iran? Obama would have absolutely NO resolve in doing what needs to be done in this area. Plus, we will have increased risk (understatement) of a terrorist act in this country again. Both Obama and Clinton would be weak on Foreign Affairs.

By Hillie "Suckface" Clinton

February 27, 2008 10:25 AM | Link to this

Obama done left me,

He wont come back.

Obama done left me,

He wont come back.

Last time I saw him,

He was walking into Austin, down the tracks.

By Karl Rove

February 27, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this

Can’t get much weaker on foreign affairs than GW Mike. Look at the absolute mess he’s made. Besides Mike, like I said this election is going to be about domestic issues. It is hard for most folks to give a tinkers damn about foreign affairs when the economy is in the tank. Duhhhh!!!

By Victor Kulkosky

February 27, 2008 10:35 AM | Link to this

Yes, the media prefer Obama to Hillary. The media, or rather the people who compose the media, haven’t liked Hillary from Day One, long before Obama appeared on the scene. The media’s relationship with her husband was more complex. This suggests that media bias doesn’t break entirely along racial lines.

But it isn’t just a liberal loves liberal thing. The media have been buddies with John McCain at least since the Straight Talk Express days of Campaign 2000, and McCain is no liberal, despite what his most fanatic critics charge. The media and Giuliani have lost no love between them. Rudy’s temporary front-runner status was very distressing to the media, who were glad when he disappeared during the earlier primaries.

So yes, the media have their darlings, and their, um, whatever the opposite of darlings is. Knowing this does great damage to the media’s own pieties about objectivity. A little more actual piety about this crucial issue is much to be desired.

By Billary and the Clintettes

February 27, 2008 10:42 AM | Link to this

It’s my Party and I’ll cry if I want to,

Cry if I want to,

Cry if I want to,

You would choke too if it happened to you.

By JK

February 27, 2008 10:44 AM | Link to this

This is an easy one. The media care about ratings. Period. As Mr. Wooten demonstrates for us daily, they ignore the tired old concept of objective, substantive reporting in order to sensationalize minutia, stir up salacious scandals, manufacture outrage, and “analyze” events ad nauseum on every “news” channel in every hour until we can regurgitate it in our sleep.

Of COURSE they want Obama to win the nomination! Hillary is OLD news… they’ve been dragging her through the mud for 15 years, and she still holds her head up and smiles. They’ve been singing his praises in every broadcast, while rolling their eyes and scoffing at every mention of her [dreaded] name. WHY? If anyone thinks they’re going to keep singing his praises after the nomination, I have some beachfront property in Kansas to sell you. Stay tuned for all the gossip, innuendo, and flat out MADE UP horse hooey Glenn Beck and the boys can fling across the airways while shouting and flailing their arms. “TUNE IN AT EIGHT! YOU’RE NOT GONNA BELIEVE WHAT WE HAVE TO TELL YOU TONIGHT!” Fresh face, fresh meat.

By Obamamania

February 27, 2008 11:19 AM | Link to this

Look at Wooten’s blog today: He not only is out of ideas, but he asks the wrong question, postulates from the wrong premises, and doesn’t even understand what the media involvement in this campaign portends.

We’re supposed to conclude that not only is the media liberal, but it is discreetly liberal, prefering one liberal to another.

The succinctly-formed question would have been: What does the data show about how much face time McCain gets vs Obama. (but only a moron would even pose that lame Q, and how about you do a little digging and get some damn facts, you leg-lifting newshound)

Take a vacation, Wooten. Do some data mining. Come back in 09. Your pen is out of ink. Your cub-shoes need new fields of fresh piles to step in. Your type-face needs a lift. Your wellspring of values is drained. Try Tennessee. they’ll love you.

Look folks, write Hillary off. Obama will win big in Texas and Ohio, and Hillary will concede, not willing to throw good money after bad in a race she had no business entering anyway. Her incompetent handling of the campaign seals her defeat. She cant even judge the people running her day to day activities, or creating the language she scolds voters with. She has no idea what to say. Zero.

ISAIDZERO!

By Glenn

February 27, 2008 11:28 AM | Link to this

Huh? What? Thanks for the lecture, Gargoyle, but I guess you’ll just have to try to write intelligibly. That would be a good start. Next, you could experiment with writing intelligently. Then, for your crowning achievement, you could take all your copy, henceforth, and roll it up in manageable wads and insert it painfully into your throat until you suffocate as surely as you suffocate us with your blogging.

Just kidding. Well done. Spot on.

By Shar

February 27, 2008 11:35 AM | Link to this

The “historic” connotations of either Senators Obama’s or Clinton’s nomination blinded the mainstream media to the candidates who opposed them, leaving the Democrats to choose between the two most media-friendly choices and leaving behind those offering more substance. Both of these Senators were only too happy to allow the media to asphyxiate their rivals, but now that they have reduced their campaigns to a charisma-off, Senator Clinton is frustrated to find her effort to communicate substance being eclipsed by Senator Obama’s easy grin and sparkling periods. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

That said, Senator Clinton’s candidacy has been unusually propped up by the media to this point. Her early success in fund raising was due almost entirely to the aura of invincibility the media gave to her. More importantly, she has been consistently treated as a serious contender despite persistent negative ratings that put a national win almost out of mathematical reach, and her string of primary losses would have doomed anyone else’s campaign to irrelevancy (see Rudy).

She took the favor of the media as her right, and its more critical tone as her campaign has erred and floundered is clearly a bitter frustration for her. It must also be very tough to see Senator Obama getting the preponderance of softball questions and being unchallenged on the substance of so many of his highflown, poetic concepts. She is hamstrung in her response, knowing that any criticism she makes will be picked up and repeated by Republicans in the general election. However, the fact remains that she received the lion’s share of editorial endorsements and coverage, she was complicit in excising substance for style, and she would not still be in contention at all if her personal history did not guarantee media attention.

She had the advantage, she used it and she blew it.

By TAFKAH

February 27, 2008 11:57 AM | Link to this

Sweet jumping jesus, jim. You’re not even trying any more. Is this really all you could come up with today? The bean counters at Cox should ask you for a refund.

A little effort next time, at least, please. I suspect you put more ooomph into your morning evacuation.

By McCain Unable

February 27, 2008 11:57 AM | Link to this

Glad you like the material. Feel free to steal. then folks’ll think that YOU’RE the genius instead of the licktoast-intolerant, yet strangely-unscraped cheekcheese you truly are, man.

.

By getalife

February 27, 2008 12:07 PM | Link to this

Last night we found out Obama’s failure in the Senate on oversight for Afghanistan and NATO. This is not getting reported.

He lied when he won the Senate and said he did not have the experience to run for President and need to serve in the Senate but ran anyway.

Now we found out he is not serving in the Senate.

He chose running for President over winning in Afghanistan.

He should resign from the Senate as a complete failure.

By jm

February 27, 2008 12:07 PM | Link to this

A moment of silence for a true conservative - William F. Buckley Jr. - even if you did not agree with him (like me - most of the time), he was always entertaining.

By Curious Observer

February 27, 2008 12:27 PM | Link to this

I genuinely hope we don’t have to sit through another debate between the Democratic candidates. Each time, Hillary gets her clock cleaned. Obama sits there, listening respectfully like the pedestrian who comes upon the spectacle of a madman in the park, while Hillary rants. He then responds with devastating taste and circumspection.

With each debate, I’ve come to respect Obama more for what he does not say. He refrains from pointing out the obvious. Still, just once, I would love to hear him say, “Hillary, you couldn’t get a resolution praising the springtime through the Senate without having three motions for censure lodged against you.”

Let’s get on with the general election. The primary races of the two parties are over. It’s just a matter of how much Clintonian stubbornness we will continue to see until she drops out.

By Bill F

February 27, 2008 12:27 PM | Link to this

I keep seeing the election mentioned for November 11th; that’s the day the republican’s vote and the democrat’s vote on the 4th, right?

By getalife

February 27, 2008 12:43 PM | Link to this

Did the media report Obama voted for cheney’s energy bill but Clinton voted no?

That is right people, when you pay 4 bucks a gallon at the pump, you can thank Obama.

You want this guy to run the econmy?

Hell no, and remember the Clinton economy.

By Captain Freedom

February 27, 2008 12:50 PM | Link to this

THE Captain takes a moment from scourging the Internet tubes for apostasy and treason to honor the memory of William F Buckley, Jr. WFB was a Godly conservative, and a gentlemen man who knew who to dress up garden variety bigotry in fine language and genteel discourse. This perspocacious solon was a Confederate by nature, though a Yankee by birth. Tragic, really, like a woman trapped inside a man’s body.

Godspeed, Buckley. Don’t pack a sweater.

By Ron

February 27, 2008 12:53 PM | Link to this

well said jm.

By Disgusted

February 27, 2008 1:01 PM | Link to this

To paraphrase a great Renaissance poet, William F. Buckley, Jr. was as Hyperion to a satyr when compared to the garden-variety hatemongers now posing as conservatives.

By getalife

February 27, 2008 1:10 PM | Link to this

Dang, there goes my argument that Obama will not fight back.

“John McCain may like to say he wants to follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of Hell, but so far all he’s done is follow George Bush into a misguided war in Iraq.”

Score one for Obama.

By Obamabot for pocket change!

February 27, 2008 1:17 PM | Link to this

“That is right people, when you pay 4 bucks a gallon at the pump, you can thank Obama.”

Another korrupt klinton licking idiot who has the cranial capacity and memory of a cockroach. Actually you can thank liberals for not allowing the US to drill for its own energy, for the increase in differences of fuel formulations, and lastly but certainly not least, for making it all but impossible for oil companies to build new refineries. That is all irrespective of the fact that oil companies are having a hard time recruiting new employees for the future. Could it be that liberals and their constant b!tch!ng about BIG OIL has caused it to appear as a negative field to go into? Just something to ponder there. Don’t let the truth ever get in the way of a good bedwet. Hey Nancy, what have you done lately for us on your promise to get pump prices under control LAST YEAR? Note how you don’t see any quacks on the left whining about Nancy and Harry’s broken promises. You talk about stupid sheep..

By the way, why did McCain apologize for his introducer saying “BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA!” a few times? Is that his full name or not? Why are the Obamabots all drooling and having convulsions? Was that a racist comment? Islamaphobic? More stupid sheep.

“Godspeed, Buckley. Don’t pack a sweater.”

I see. Well since you put it that way, hater, I suppose he and Molly Ivins are going to have a lot to chat about.

By BS Aplenty

February 27, 2008 1:19 PM | Link to this

It was always a great pleasure to read the sharp, trenchant wit of the great Buckley. When I read the THE Captain & Disgusted I am reminded of that wit - only half so.

By Copyleft

February 27, 2008 1:28 PM | Link to this

Getalife, you seem bothered by Obama’s victory. Is he making it look too easy?

Relax; we’re still going to get a better, more liberal president and a smarter, more liberal America as a result. Things are looking up!

By Copyleft

February 27, 2008 1:34 PM | Link to this

Pocket Change: Ahh, so you’re one of the “energy means drilling” nitwits, eh? Sorry you won’t have an Oil Man to run things for you any more; America has gotten a bit smarter than that.

By Disgusted

February 27, 2008 1:43 PM | Link to this

When I read the THE Captain & Disgusted I am reminded of that wit - only half so.

Well, I never!

By getalife

February 27, 2008 2:19 PM | Link to this

Army Chief Of Staff General George Casey: “No Reason To Doubt” Obama On Troop Shortages.

Support the troops?

BS.

Good for the General and Captain for risking their careers to tell the truth.

I feel better about Obama because he is fighting back.

By AmVet

February 27, 2008 2:26 PM | Link to this

Best post of the day?

Glenn’s 8:59.

Hands down.

Either we get these mind numbing and insignificant columns regarding “events” on the national stage or even more arcane snoozers regarding our Republican heroes here in Ga.

We want meat, Mr. Wooten, not this soy substitute!

By Allah says Dump A BUCKET OF PIG BLOOD ON DUSTY AKA JMBLAW

February 27, 2008 2:43 PM | Link to this

Why do I need to support the troops? Don’t I pay taxes that do that already? Oh, you mean support the troops with rhetoric so the politicians can safely hide BEHIND the troops..No, I will not do that

By Allah says Dump A BUCKET OF PIG BLOOD ON DUSTY AKA JMBLAW

February 27, 2008 2:52 PM | Link to this

Well, this ends future job prospects for 90% of uga graduates: No more private security service jobs guarding the offices of Ga Tech graduates. “Increasingly autonomous, gun-totting robots developed for warfare could easily fall into the hands of terrorists and may one day unleash a robot arms race, a top expert on artificial intelligence told AFP. “They pose a threat to humanity,” said University of Sheffield professor Noel Sharkey ahead of a keynote address Wednesday before Britain’s Royal United Services Institute.

Intelligent machines deployed on battlefields around the world — from mobile grenade launchers to rocket-firing drones — can already identify and lock onto targets without human help.

There are more than 4,000 US military robots on the ground in Iraq, as well as unmanned aircraft that have clocked hundreds of thousands of flight hours.

The first three armed combat robots fitted with large-caliber machine guns deployed to Iraq last summer, manufactured by US arms maker Foster-Miller, proved so successful that 80 more are on order, said Sharkey.

But up to now, a human hand has always been required to push the button or pull the trigger.

It we are not careful, he said, that could change.

Military leaders “are quite clear that they want autonomous robots as soon as possible, because they are more cost-effective and give a risk-free war,” he said.

Several countries, led by the United States, have already invested heavily in robot warriors developed for use on the battlefield.

South Korea and Israel both deploy armed robot border guards, while China, India, Russia and Britain have all increased the use of military robots.

Washington plans to spend four billion dollars by 2010 on unmanned technology systems, with total spending expected rise to 24 billion, according to the Department of Defense’s Unmanned Systems Roadmap 2007-2032, released in December.

James Canton, an expert on technology innovation and CEO of the Institute for Global Futures, predicts that deployment within a decade of detachments that will include 150 soldiers and 2,000 robots.

The use of such devices by terrorists should be a serious concern, said Sharkey.

Captured robots would not be difficult to reverse engineer, and could easily replace suicide bombers as the weapon-of-choice. “I don’t know why that has not happened already,” he said.

But even more worrisome, he continued, is the subtle progression from the semi-autonomous military robots deployed today to fully independent killing machines.

“I have worked in artificial intelligence for decades, and the idea of a robot making decisions about human termination terrifies me,” Sharkey said.

Ronald Arkin of Georgia Institute of Technology, who has worked closely with the US military on robotics, agrees that the shift towards autonomy will be gradual.

But he is not convinced that robots don’t have a place on the front line.

“Robotics systems may have the potential to out-perform humans from a perspective of the laws of war and the rules of engagement,” he told a conference on technology in warfare at Stanford University last month.

The sensors of intelligent machines, he argued, may ultimately be better equipped to understand an environment and to process information. “And there are no emotions that can cloud judgement, such as anger,” he added.

Nor is there any inherent right to self-defence.

For now, however, there remain several barriers to the creation and deployment of Terminator-like killing machines.

Some are technical. Teaching a computer-driven machine — even an intelligent one — how to distinguish between civilians and combatants, or how to gauge a proportional response as mandated by the Geneva Conventions, is simply beyond the reach of artificial intelligence today.

But even if technical barriers are overcome, the prospect of armies increasingly dependent on remotely-controlled or autonomous robots raises a host of ethical issues that have barely been addressed.

Arkin points out that the US Department of Defense’s 230 billion dollar Future Combat Systems programme — the largest military contract in US history — provides for three classes of aerial and three land-based robotics systems.

“But nowhere is there any consideration of the ethical implications of the weaponisation of these systems,” he said.

For Sharkey, the best solution may be an outright ban on autonomous weapons systems. “We have to say where we want to draw the line and what we want to do — and then get an international agreement,” he said.”

By GayGreyGeek

February 27, 2008 2:56 PM | Link to this

Allah - no, “support the troops” means magnetic yellow ribbons - NSFW YouTube - and parroting whatever Faux News announces as Today’s Paleocon Talking Points.

By getalife

February 27, 2008 3:04 PM | Link to this

w spews GFY on those missing emails.

Enough with this criminal.

Time to impeach like Clinton.

By Sam

February 27, 2008 4:08 PM | Link to this

By Realist

February 27, 2008 8:42 AM | And speaking as a far right wing conservative, I beleive that four years of Barack Hussein Obama would do more harm to the safety, economy and well being of this nation that Bush Jr. ever did.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! “Far right wing conservatives” are as grave a threat to the freedoms that we have enjoyed in this country as any of the so called dangers that they constantly catterwaul against. Deport em all (right wing conservatives)I say.

By @@

February 27, 2008 4:24 PM | Link to this

Without a doubt Jim! The media is selecting our candidates for us, and therein lies my greatest fear. For Obama and the liberals, I offer Mark Twain:

We like to read about rich people in the newspapers; the papers know it, and they do their best to keep this appetite liberally fed.

• Mark Twain in Eruption

Riding on Sam’s coattails I’d like to add:

“and then they can blame all the world’s ills on the rich inciting class warfare.”

By Jackie

February 27, 2008 4:24 PM | Link to this

@Glenn,

I was not able to respond to Dusty yesterday as she chose to post when the blog was closing. I think she refuses to see the truth for what it is, our military is at the point of breaking. This is coming from the professional military, no less!

By getalife

February 27, 2008 4:30 PM | Link to this

News media unfair to Clinton?

Jack Cafferty read Dowd and Peggy Noonan hit pieces on the Clintons on the air.

Duh.

Of course, SNL nailed them on this obvious bias but they do not have enough credibilty to admit it.

No credibilty for MSNBC too.

Pathetic.

By @@

February 27, 2008 4:35 PM | Link to this

,

By getalife

February 27, 2008 4:50 PM | Link to this

Voters should be asking why the obvious bias for Obama on corporate CNN and MSNBC?

Not if, that is obvious.

Are they going to turn and attack Obama to help elect McInsane?

How much has Obama paid kos and arianna for the obvious bias on Daily Obama and the Obama Post?

Does this media have any credibilty with this obvious bias?

Those are questions I would like answered. It stinks to high heaven Jim and you know it.

By Dusty

February 27, 2008 5:11 PM | Link to this

Good work, Jim Wooten….

You got the libs all running in circles, slapping each other on the back and foaming at the mouth. They are too lazy to take a lil’ mouse and move to another blog if they don’t like this one. But you couldn’t run them off with a stick if you tried. Good work!

Now, as to Obama, I have exciting expectations.

Any day now he is going to say how much he loves and praises his white mama who raised him in Hawaii. That he plans to join some white fellow surfers and pose on his surf board in his luau leotard, in Hawaii, of course. Reaching out to his family heritage, you know.(Attn: photographers!)

Next he will ask the minister of his church to give a Sensitivity Award to David Duke for his long understanding of relationships. Obama will also mention that he did not ask for Duke’s support but it is a free country.

Next, with a big smile, Obama will tell us that he, too, has at last found something he likes in the USA. Yes, indeed, THE WHITE HOUSE. Madame Obama also agrees that such a thought also makes her very happy for the first time.

Obama will carry out his support of the troops by moving them from Iraq immediately..YES..to Palestine to protect those poor innocent picked-on persons. AND he will personally throw a party for any Palestinian who will stop blasting rockets at Israel. What a peacemaker!! And furthermore, he himself will direct all troops. There will be no need for Petraeus or any other West Point General. Obama commands!!

Do not worry about the budget. Obama will conquer!..Surely you will not mind giving 50% of your income for a little help. That is, until socialized medicine kicks in, and then you can hand over your entire paycheck. Halleluia & praise the Obama budget!! It even finances bread lines.

Oh yes, the media is going to love these Obama obligations. Their favorite candidate is going to take care of the USA, one way or another. And please, no swift boating this DREAMBOAT!! Oh..oh…the charisma…how sweet it is!!

By Obamabot for pocket change!

February 27, 2008 5:27 PM | Link to this

“w spews GFY on those missing emails”

Gee getalife, that sounds JUST like Shrillary and those missing Rose Law firm documents that were subpoenaed - and later wound up mysteriously “found” in the Clinton White House by an aide. Then we have Sandysocks Berger and disappearing National Archives documents related to subpoenaed Clinton administration documents related to the 9/11 investigation. Democrats and subpoenaed documents don’t exactly mix well either, Mr. Kettle.

By Shar

February 27, 2008 5:35 PM | Link to this

BS Aplenty @ 1:19: What a compliment to give to THE Cap and Disgusted. Political disagreement aside, half of Buckley’s wit still constitutes an overflowing treasure. I’d call myself rich with but a tithe of it.

By Obamabot for pocket change!

February 27, 2008 5:37 PM | Link to this

“You got the libs all running in circles, slapping each other on the back and foaming at the mouth. They are too lazy to take a lil’ mouse and move to another blog if they don’t like this one. But you couldn’t run them off with a stick if you tried.”

Dusty, that’s because liberals are the most intolerant group of ideological hate festerers there is. They become obsessed with those who believe in or say something that goes against their beliefs. They cannot stand the fact Conservatives are out there with voices, be it in radio or on blogs such as this. I’ve seen these disgusting goons on the left infest just about every Conservative blog there is to harass, threaten, and in some instances actually stalk bloggers and attempt to track them down. I have not heard of a single Conservative doing that on a liberal blog. They really are pathetic.

By jm

February 27, 2008 5:38 PM | Link to this

pocket change - it was W the incompetent’s justice department that let Berger walk, not Clinton’s.

By Jackie

February 27, 2008 5:39 PM | Link to this

@Dusty,

Here are words that you wrote concerning a post I addressed to Glenn concerning problems the Marines said they were having with the MWRAP and how the Marines are going to get the Inspector General involved in the investigation. “By Dusty February 26, 2008 6:24 PM | Link to this Ok, children, time to go get your tummies filled so you won’t be madder than the Mad Hatter. Sounds like we may have a po ol’fo running wild again, speaking of madness. Glenn, Jackie is not seeking explanations. He simply wants to dump a bunch of complaints on anybody who will listen. All the complaints will be about the military, the treatment of veterans and Bush is to blame. He has a one track mind and absorbs nothing. I skip over his litanies because I don’t think he can overcome the maladies of his mind. Good night all. Sleep tight etc. etc. etc.

By Glenn February 26, 2008 5:07 PM | Link to this Jackie, Correct me if I’m wrong, but here’s the way the Marine Corps beef will play out. The issue will get a couple letters of concern from congress members to the Liaison Office. Being triangulated from the Hill, the serving personnel and the veterans, the Pentagon will refer the matter to the Navy I.G., and since nobody gets to be I.G. without being a four-star a$$-coverer and company boy, the issue gets some drooling lip service sometime after the news cycles have turned over a couple thousand times. Sound about right?” ……… Now, you are the one that always speak of “supporting the troops” and other such nonsense at that. Secondly, you post when the blog is ready to close with the apparent intent of hoping your words will be overlooked. Let me say this again to you SLOW-MOTION!!!!! The depth and breath of your STUPIDITY is UNBELIEVABLY STUNNING AND BREATHTAKING!!! You are so myopic with your apparent worship of Dubya it appears the flatulence is making your ears wiggle. You can not read, comprehend or think in a comprehensive and clear manner. You seem to think that your words(lies) are gospel because you spoke them. You seem this outrageous claim about supporting the troops when you have no idea what that means. Take a poll in this blog and find out how many vets support, understand or believe anything you say; how many vets believe, understand or support your contention that Dubya was a member of the US Armed Forces, be it Active Duty, Reserve or National Guard. So, I will say this to you for the last time because it is apparent that you “just don’t get it.” You have a SEVERE CASE OF DIAHARREA OF THE LIP; YOU SPEAK LOUD AND SAY NOTHING; YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!

By getalife

February 27, 2008 5:40 PM | Link to this

Of course, the missing emails are in Sandy’s socks.

Moron much?

Damn.

By Obamabot for pocket change!

February 27, 2008 5:42 PM | Link to this

“Voters should be asking why the obvious bias for Obama on corporate CNN and MSNBC?”

Haha! Look who’s only now crying about media bias. It’s Mr. Kettle again!

Getalife, you are about to go over a cliff if you keep staying with the dwindling Clinton sheepherders. Sucks to be wrong, don’t it?

By Obamabot for pocket change!

February 27, 2008 5:50 PM | Link to this

“Of course, the missing emails are in Sandy’s socks.”

Right under that construction trailer, Mr. Kettle. Effin’ hypocritical cockroach brain.

By Jackie

February 27, 2008 5:50 PM | Link to this

@Dusty,

Not only are you a racist, you are a STUPID RACIST!!!!

By Sad But True

February 27, 2008 5:50 PM | Link to this

Getalife, I’m feelin’ ya, Dude, but we might as well let it go now. Bart was right all along. The wh-o-re media are owned by those who call the shots; they’re getting what they wanted right now, and we have nothing to say about it. (my words:) Democracy is an illusion. Most of the candidates never got to be heard anyway. Where’s DK? His brother got Wellstoned and now he’s silent. Those really in control are not giving it up, no matter whom they allow to be inaugurated. They have what they wanted all along.

By Obamabot for pocket change!

February 27, 2008 5:53 PM | Link to this

Wow! Dusty got Jackie all jacked up. ROTFLMAO! Kindly note how twisted and A-N-G-R-Y this wretched lib is. What joy!

Keep up the good work Dusty. The more maddening froth that oozes from their keyboard, the better here.

By getalife

February 27, 2008 6:06 PM | Link to this

Sad but true,

Yup. There is no way they will give up power to Obama.

BTW, I am watching the debate on Iraq on C-Span2. Feingold-Reid redeployment.

Obama said he will vote no with the gop , Clinton yes with the Dems.

Go figure.

By Obamabot for pocket change!

February 27, 2008 6:06 PM | Link to this

bm - Read much? I wasn’t complaining about Sockthroat getting off with a wrist slap. Go back and re-read my post. I was just exposing the forgotten shenanigans and current hypocrisy by the kook left here, that’s all.

By Shar

February 27, 2008 6:28 PM | Link to this

Jackie, restore your tranquility. It’s not worth getting worked up over chatter on a blog. Particularly over the posts of “Dusty”.

It seems to me that there are two explanations, both equally plausible, for the tone and quality of “her” posts. One, “she” has resolutely chosen to abandon what Franklin and Jefferson both said was the first duty of loyal citizens, to inform themselves and think. There is no analysis, no comprehension in “her” posts, only slogans and taunts. “She” is sufficiently articulate to indicate that “she” has the education and capacity for critical intelligence, but “she” has clearly and absolutely refused to use it. “She” makes me sad for all the wrong reasons.

I use these quotation marks because I have begun to believe that “Dusty” does not, in fact, exist. The postings are sufficiently aggravating in their abusiveness and ignorance to incite a great deal of response. And response is the measure by which Mr. Wooten and the AJC gauge the success of their blogs. “Dusty” may well be a fabricated persona to rile up the readership.

By Allah says Dump A BUCKET OF PIG BLOOD ON DUSTY AKA JMBLAW

February 28, 2008 8:25 AM | Link to this

John McCain:Unfit to serve as Commander-In-Chief The spoiled son of military privilege got a free ride throughout his military career despite repeated instances of sex scandals and screw-ups …

By Ted Sampley U.S. Veteran Dispatch January 27, 2008

John Sidney McCain III entered the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland in 1954. Young McCain wanted to become an admiral. He planned to be the “first son and grandson of four star admirals” to achieve such a distinction. But that was not to be. McCain III possessed none of the innate character and discipline traits that helped mold his father and grandfather into great military leaders.

His father, John S. “Junior” McCain, and grandfather, John S. McCain, Sr., were famous four-star Admirals in the U.S. Navy. His father commanded U.S. forces in Europe before becoming commander of American forces fighting in Vietnam. His grandfather commanded naval aviation at the Battle of Okinawa in 1945. Both men became highly influential in U.S. Navy operations.

At the Academy, aside being known as a “rowdy, raunchy, underachiever” who resented authority, Cadet McCain became infamous as a leader among his fellow midshipmen for organizing “off-Yard activities” and hard drinking parties. Robert Timberg wrote in his book, The Nightingale’s Song, that “being on liberty with John McCain was like being in a train wreck.”

McCain’s grades were “marginal.” He drew so many demerits for breaking curfew and other discipline issues that he graduated fifth from the bottom of the class of 1958. Despite his low “class standing,” and no doubt because of the influence of his family of famous Admirals, McCain was leap-frogged ahead of more qualified applicants and granted a coveted slot to be trained as a navy pilot.

Good Party Animal - Bad Pilot:

He spent the next two and a half years as a “naval aviator in training” at Naval Air Station Pensacola in Florida and Naval Air Station Corpus Christi in Texas, flying A-1 Skyraiders.

While a pilot trainee, McCain continued to party hard. He drove a Corvette and dated an exotic dancer named “Marie the Flame of Florida.” Timberg wrote that McCain “learned to fly at Pensacola, though his performance was below par, at best good enough to get by. He liked flying, but didn’t love it.”

McCain Lost Five Military Aircraft

McCain, the “below par” pilot, eventually lost 5 military aircraft, the first during a training flight in 1958 when he plunged into Corpus Christi Bay while trying to land. The Navy ignored the crash and graduated McCain in 1960.

While deployed in the Mediterranean, the hard partying McCain lost a second aircraft. Timberg described the crash: “Flying too low over the Iberian Peninsula, he took out some power lines which led to a spate of newspaper stories in which he was predictably identified as the son of an admiral.”

Unscathed, McCain returned to Pensacola Station where he was promoted to flight instructor for Naval Air Station Meridian in Mississippi. The airfield at Meridian, McCain Field, was named in honor of McCain’s grandfather.

In 1964 McCain became involved with Carol Shepp, a model from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, he had met at Annapolis. They were married in Philadelphia on July 3, 1965.

Flight instructor McCain lost a third aircraft while flying a Navy trainer solo to Philadelphia for an Army-Navy football game. Timberg wrote that McCain radioed, “I’ve got a flameout” before ejecting at one thousand feet. McCain parachuted onto a beach moments before his plane slammed into a clump of trees.

The Navy dismissed the crash as “unavoidable” and assigned McCain to the aircraft carrier USS Forrestal in December 1966, which was patrolling the Mediterranean Sea and Atlantic Ocean. In Spring 1967, the Forrestal was assigned to join the Operation Rolling Thunder bombing campaign against North Vietnam.

McCain lost his fourth plane on board the Forrestal on July 29, 1967 when a rocket inadvertently slammed into his bomb laden jet. McCain escaped, but the explosions that followed killed 134 sailors. McCain was transferred from the badly damaged Forrestal to the USS Oriskany. Shortly afterwards, on Oct. 26, 1967, he was shot down and captured by the Vietnamese.

Post-POW Years: Political Ambition and a New, Young, Rich Wife

Upon his release from North Vietnam and return to the United States in 1973, McCain reunited with his wife, Carol, who had been permanently crippled in a car accident while he was a POW.

Still yearning to become an admiral, McCain enrolled in the National War College at Fort McNair in Washington, D.C. and underwent physical therapy in order to fly again. The Navy excused his permanent disabilities and reinstated him to flight status, effectively positioning him for promotion.

Timberg described McCain’s advancement: “in the fall of 1974, McCain was transferred to Jacksonville as the executive officer of Replacement Air Group 174, the long-sought flying billet at last a reality. A few months later, he assumed command of the RAG, which trained pilots and crews for carrier deployments. The assignment was controversial, some calling it favoritism, a sop to the famous son of a famous father and grandfather, since he had not first commanded a squadron, the usual career path.”

While Executive Officer and later as Squadron Commander McCain used his authority to arrange frequent flights that allowed him to carouse with subordinates and “engage in extra-marital affairs.”

This was a clear violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice rules against adultery and fraternization with subordinates. But, as with all his other past behaviors, McCain was never penalized; instead he always got away with his transgressions.

Timberg wrote, “Off duty, usually on routine cross-country flights to Yuma and El Centro, John started carousing and running around with women. To make matters worse, some of the women with whom he was linked by rumor were subordinates … At the time the rumors were so widespread that, true or not, they became part of McCain’s persona, impossible not to take note of.”

In early 1977, Admiral Jim Holloway, Chief of Naval Operations promoted McCain to captain and transferred him from his command position “to Washington as the number-two man in the Navy’s Senate liaison office. McCain was promptly given total control of the office. It wasn’t long before the “fun loving and irreverent” McCain had turned the liaison office into a “late-afternoon gathering spot where senators and staffers, usually from the Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees, would drop in for a drink and the chance to unwind.”

In 1979, while attending a military reception in Hawaii, McCain met and fell in love with Cindy Lou Hensley, 17 years his junior, who was the daughter of James W. Hensley, a wealthy Anheuser-Busch distributor from Phoenix, Arizona. McCain filed for and obtained an uncontested divorce from his wife in Florida on April 2, 1980 and promptly married Cindy on May 17, 1980.

He resigned from the Navy in 1981 and went to work for his father-in-law in Phoenix; where he used the opportunity to make powerful and wealthy friends in Arizona including banker Charles Keating and Duke Tully, the editor-in-chief of the Arizona Republic. Keating was later convicted of fraud, racketeering, and conspiracy and Tully was disgraced for concocting a phony military record of combat in Korea and Vietnam including medals for heroism.

McCain ran for Arizona’s First Congressional District in 1982. McCain won the congressional seat. In 1987 McCain was elected to the Senate.

By Copyleft

February 28, 2008 8:26 AM | Link to this

There’s no reason for anyone to get worked up about the dying remnant of faithful Republican drones who continually post here. Their kind will be gone soon, along with the dinosaurs they emulate.

A better, more liberal America’s coming, and things couldn’t be better for REAL Americans (i.e., non-Republicans). Wheeee!

By Allah says Dump A BUCKET OF PIG BLOOD ON DUSTY AKA JMBLAW

February 28, 2008 8:46 AM | Link to this

Why has McCain been Communist Vietnam’s best friend in the US Congress?

Was McCain blackmailed? Is Vietnam still holding something over his head? Was McCain brainwashed?

John McCain voted to establish normal relations with Vietnam

McCain thinks it’s very important for us to recognize that the war is over.

John McCain, the Senate’s foremost advocate of normalized relations with Vietnam

McCain worked passionately for the normalization of U.S.-Vietnam ties

McCain supports normalizing trade relations with Vietnam

By Dusty

February 28, 2008 8:51 AM | Link to this

Good morning, I have only a few minutes before I leave but I did want to respond to Shar.

Sorry, Shar, but I am a real honest to goodness person. As to being a fabricated persona to incite Jim Wooten’s bloggers, he can incite them quite well on his own. Besides, he is too ethical for that. Now the AJC, I am not sure. But they haven’t contacted me and they better not.

My suppositions of yesterday are based on the facts published about Obama. That is, everything from his heritage trips to Kenya to his anti-war vote and stance. You may remain in the cult clutter of charisma as that is your choice. But do not expect everyone to follow with you. Read Apocalyse with a closed mind if all you want is a liberal opinion.

The more I learn about Obama, the less I find him suitable to govern or fight for the United States of America.

This is Dusty, alive and kicking, and I approve this message!!!

By Allah says Dump A BUCKET OF PIG BLOOD ON DUSTY AKA JMBLAW

February 28, 2008 9:10 AM | Link to this

I am an upper class white male and a former Republican who voted for Bush in 2000, Yet I am ASHAMED OF AMERICA for invading and murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent Arabs and Muslims on the pretext of bringing Democracy to the Country. I believe this war by the Neocons against Arabs and Muslims is an act of genocide and a crime against humanity for which the entire Bush administration must be tried in the World Court, especially his warhawk advisors like wolfie, feithie, pearlie, and libbie. Those four in particular deserve the noose just like their Nazi predecesors.

By Allah says Dump A BUCKET OF PIG BLOOD ON DUSTY AKA JMBLAW

February 28, 2008 9:14 AM | Link to this

Obama is an expert on foreign policy because he will follow the advice of our First and Greatest President, George Washington. President Washington left the following advice for all of his successors: AVOID FOREIGN MILITARY ENTANGLEMENTS. Kennedy-Johnson failed to follow this advice in the 1960’s, and the wasting of 50,000 american lives in Viet Nam followed: Bush failed to follow this advice in 2003, and the current body count is almost 4,000 dead americans. We cannot afford to allow John McCain also to ignore this advice and attack Iran

By Ron

February 28, 2008 10:28 AM | Link to this

I agree with Dusty.Egad!The more I find out about Obama,the more I realize that there’s nothing there but speeches written by someone else.I wasn’t enamored with him to begin with,and I have grown less so as time passes.I just don’t trust the man.