Comments on: Obama, Hillary and McCain: The Fallout

By: Ben

Ben — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 14:30:30 +0000

T–Is it possible that some in the media realized that the Clintons care only for their own power and will do or say anything, and screw over anyone, to get it? I actually thought that Vanity Fair piece was interesting and entertaining.

As for the McCain story, its happening now because the Presidential race is heating up. I actually didn’t know all that about his ex-wife. But I did already know he was a douche.

By: Cody Sortore

Cody Sortore — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 08:55:53 +0000

Yeah, it’s obvious that the media is biased… it’s why we couldn’t ever get a good president like Ron Paul in office… Also why our system is so screwed, we see nothing but lies and half truths, our money is based upon a fictional value system, and no one believes they can change it so they don’t even bother to start… it’s sad really.

By: T.

T. — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:42:55 +0000

This site touches on many of the Obama missteps that the media conveniently glossed over, for those who think Obama is just better at keeping his nose clean:

http://www.nowpublic.com/world.....t-you-know

By: T.

T. — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:21:10 +0000

But yeah, agree with Virgle Kent on this one that Hillary?s game was just not tight, whereas Obama continues to shoot down all these silly ?controversies? like Jeremiah Wright, etc, as being childish and politics as usual. Clearly the better candidate.

I disagree. Obama’s controversies don’t stick to him like Hillary’s do, but it’s not because he’s so much better at deflecting them, it’s because the media downplays them and takes him at face value and doesn’t pursue them after he gives his weak dismissals. And trust me, as a conservative I’m no Hillary fan, but even I have to admit that the media had it out for her while handling Obama with kid gloves. Take Obama’s shady dealing with Rezko, his long time friend and fundraiser who was recently indicted for a ton of corruption. Obama was involved in potentially shady real estate deals with Rezko that increased his property lots. This is the same media that doggedly chased down any possible tenuous connection Bush had with corruption like with Ken Lay. Yet they just breeze over this Obama bombshell last week and once again take his explanation at face value. Let’s get real here, this is not great politics by Obama, it’s great propaganda by the media.

By: T.

T. — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:12:47 +0000

VK - No denying that you have to have your game tight when running for office, but when the media is playing up all your gaffes and missteps for maximum effect, while ignoring all of your opponent's, it can be pretty frustrating, which is why so many of Hillary's supporters are bitter. I mean sure Hillary messed up a lot, and I by no means think she's a great politician, but there have been so many similar gaffes by Obama it's not even funny, and the media has been downplaying them. He said there were 57 states, made tons of mistakes about foreign policy, like when he was answering questions about the Arabic translators in Iraq being needed in Afghanistan, not realizing that Afghans don't speak Arabic, saying his uncle helped liberate Auschwitz, not realizing that the Soviets actually liberated Auschwitz. Yet the media glazes over all this and focuses more on his fist bump with his wife. He says that there's no way he can disown Jeremiah Wright any more than he can disown his grandmother and claims that despite being a member in the church for 20 years and being personally mentored by Wright, he never heard a single one of those racist speeches. Then after more racist speeches by Wright occur, Obama comes out and disowns him! It's not that I'm saying Hillary doesn't deserve to be hit hard by the media when she messes up, but if that's the case the media should do the same to Obama and stop carrying water for him. The media reaches 40 years into McCain's past to slime him, yet downplays Obama's last 20 years with the radical racist megachurch? Also, I know the publication that did the hit piece on McCain was from England, but they do have an interest in US politics, as shown by all the hit pieces they did on Bush in 2004, as well as all the outraged headlines in the UK when Bush was reelected. Keep in mind that whoever wins the US election will determine the path the US takes in the Iraq War, which will affect Britain's involvement in the same war. Also, local papers aren't that local anymore thanks to the Internet and bloggers. The writers in UK know that people in America will be reading that piece and that US bloggers and news sources will be spreading it.

By: virgle Kent

virgle Kent — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:01:06 +0000

AND another thing. As far as the media is concerned this is kind of redemption for them if you think about it. six years ago they were all up on Bush’s nut sack over going to war and nobody in the media as a whole really questioned Bush (except for Keith Olbermann).

Now they want to be able to say “yeah we backed this guy from the start to get us out of Iraq”.

virgle Kents last blog post..The biggest WAIT WHAT moment of the summer

By: Rick

Rick — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 21:26:15 +0000

The whole “Hillary supporters voting for McCain” thing is such a joke. How does it follow that just because your very-slightly-different-than-Obama candidate who is a liberal female didn’t win the nomination, you’re now going to vote Republican? Some might, but I just don’t see what was so appealing about Hillary as a candidate that any alternative on the left would be unfavorable compared to McCain. The key issue in this campaign will come down to more-of-the-same vs. a hopeful, though possibly unrealistically idealistic, change for the better. Barring any dead hooker scenarios I see Obama getting it done in November.

Regarding the “liberal media” favoring Obama, I can see where one could have that perception. I think most of that has to do with 1) Obama being a likeable, inspiring candidate that is refreshing and almost unprecedented, in a Mr. Smith Goes To Washington kind of way, and 2) People seeing Hillary stubbornly continue to campaign for so long as worthy of contempt and criticism. I wouldn’t say this is a bias the media should be showing, if we are assuming there really was a bias, but there is opinion/editorial all over the place in this garbage cable news environment we have today. I also don’t think anyone on the right is allowed to say shit after the last 8 years of Fox News prominence. That, combined with the rarely-referenced-anymore media frenzy/ejaculation about the complete non-issue that was Clinton’s blowjob, makes the whole “liberal media” argument just look uninformed and weak. I mean I agree that the story was big news and worthy of coverage, but impeachment? I mean if thats the ground for impeachment, shouldn’t, as Patton Oswalt put it, Bush and Cheney been publicly beaten to death on the lawn of the White House with Aerosmith playing and everyone being all “yeah!! fuck that guy!!!”.

But yeah, agree with Virgle Kent on this one that Hillary’s game was just not tight, whereas Obama continues to shoot down all these silly “controversies” like Jeremiah Wright, etc, as being childish and politics as usual. Clearly the better candidate. As with Dean/Kerry in ’04, the party will now rally around the candidate, as I voted for Kerry even though I was a huge Dean guy.

By: virgle Kent

virgle Kent — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 20:23:03 +0000

I agree with this post fo sho. Yeah the media is hella biased. At the same time knowing this Hillary needed to step her game WAY up and run a tight campaign. It wasn?t the media?s fault she told stories about ducking from sniper fire. It wasn?t the media?s fault she got stomped on the voting for the war issue. And it sure as hell isn?t the media?s fault Bill can?t control his dick or not hangout with the crew while his wife is running for presidency. There?s going to be hit pieces all over the place trust me so one must keep their game tight at all times. As far as McCain is concerned, Steve Wonder could have seen that one coming. You don?t do your first wife dirty, run for presidency and expect the media (that loves Obama) to sit on that story. Again this is politics a fucking blood sport, nothing is sacred. Even though I?m sure (75%) the outlet that ran that story is in England?. Just saying virgle Kents last blog post..The biggest WAIT WHAT moment of the summer