Obama, Clinton take a detour to the high road
The intensity of the race-based debate surrounding the two leading Democratic presidential candidates seemed poised to get worse, not better. The tone and volume of the dispute was not only driving a wedge in the party, it seemed like the kind of clash that could do lasting damage.
Fortunately, before matters got out of control, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton decided yesterday that it was time to take the high road. Obama got this started yesterday afternoon with a press conference in Nevada.
“I’ve been a little concerned about the tenor of the campaign over the last few days,” Obama told reporters in Reno, Nevada, after speaking to about 2,500 people at a rally. “We share the same goals, we are all Democrats, we all believe in civil rights, we all believe in equal rights.”
“I think that (former President) Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton have historically and consistently been on the right side of civil rights issues,” he added. “I think they care about the African American community and they care about all Americans and they want to see equal rights and equal justice in this country.”
Obama added, “I may disagree with Senator Clinton and Senator Edwards on how to get there, but we share the same goals.... They are good people. They are patriots.... I don’t want the campaign at this stage to degenerate to so much tit-for-tat, back-and-forth, that we lose sight of why we are doing this. We’ve got too much at stake at this time in our history to be engaging in this kind of silliness.”
Shortly thereafter, Clinton followed suit with a very encouraging statement. “Over this past week, there has been a lot of discussion and back and forth - much of which I know does not reflect what is in our hearts. And at this moment, I believe we must seek common ground," Clinton said, adding, “[W]hen it comes to civil rights and our commitment to diversity, when it comes to our heroes - President John F. Kennedy and Dr. King – Senator Obama and I are on the same side."
Good for both of them. I suspect the temptation to fan the flames and raise the temperature was great, but this was, without a doubt, the right way to go.
I'll believe it when I say it from them, especially hillary. The question is what are their surrogates going to do.
Anyone have a violin? Let us all savor this moment before we have to serenade it later.
Got milk?
I saw Clinton on Meet the Press and she was saying she was against pre-emptive war...but she gave Bush the power he needed anyway? If she is so short sighted that she couldn't see that Bushco was salivating over Iraq then she doesn't have what we need for our next President. If she would have stood up to Bushco then maybe she would be worth a damn, but as I can see it she is just Bush without the autism.
It's the media distorting everything that is said.
“I’ve been a little concerned about the tenor of the campaign over the last few days,”
Really?
The baritone was the one pissing me off!
it's kind of cute how america forgets it's a sexist racist and actually entertains the notion of electing a woman or a black man.
But don't worry.
America will remember who it is in plenty of time.
Hello John Edwards!!
It's a lead pipe lock.
Sometimes, do any of you feel like you are back in middle or grade school the way these politicians and media pundits act and talk? I mean too often listening to their reasoning, logic, and words, I think I am back in grade-middle school, not even high school.
And to think many of these media people and politicians graduatd from Ivy League schools and have elitisit backgrounds from youth. Well, it is obvious that many of these politicians and media people act adoloscent is because they are developmentally abnormal.
Mr. XXXX @ 7:
Do you think they are talking down to you Mr. X? Do you think they think you are a fool? That i am a fool?
I think so too.
Good....about time....
The Media wants a snake pit.....people want reality.
Lets hope tonights debate doesn't devolve before our very eyes....of course that's asking for a 'miracle' with Russert & Brian "GOP" Williams 'moderating' err....asking idiotic questions about statements made 20 years ago & bringing up republican talking points....
Meanwhile when they have a GOP debate, these same idiots ask hard hitting questions like what's your favorite ice cream flavor, color, and how much torture are you going to do....
Stop the Presses! Hillary is now downplaying Lyndon Johnsons roll in the Civil Rights movement!
Flip Flopper! Flip Flopper! ;-)
right wing hater @ 9:
"Mr. Kucinich, everybody here knows you are a left wing nutcase. What we really want to know is, where you abducted by those aliens you saw?"
lets be honest, it is a great move for Hillary. We all know damn well that if they can make him appear blacker it works against him. Sickening as it may be, he is taking away white votes. These people aren't dumb.
If they can take Obama out sooner than later than maybe enough people will see that john Edwards is the right guy to fight for Middle America
Radically Moderate @ 10:
Why is it that i can spot a right winger when by the way they name a common informal piece of foot apparel?
Mr. XXXX @ 7:
At the moment, Joe Scarborough is going to commercial with the promo that wer're going to come back and talk about the "race wars". Willie G. even had the wherewithall to questoin that characterization so magnanamously he changed his terminology to race skirmishes. Actually he was being snide.
I'm for any Dem over a neocon, but I bet the neocons, neosheep, and con media are pissed.
xoites defends Constitution @ 13:
Did you see the ;-) at the end?
I hope everone notices that as usual Hillary had her finger in the wind and didn't respond until after Obama called for a higher decorum. Her sincerity her is just as fake as her crocodile tearing up last week.
good to see that obama chose to lead to the high road, and clinton decided to follow.
this little tantrum on her part has demonstrated why she is ill-equipped to be the nomination, and why obama's unique leadership is necessary to lift the nation out of the mudpit it's become, run by the porkers in dc who behave the way clinton has through this silly episode.
bravo
Radically Moderate @ 16:
Yeah, sorry. I was just thinking...
Right now some Republican is fantasizing about a Hillary/Obama ticket. They win and then Bill catches them in the Lincoln Room and kills them and goes up for murder. It truly is the Republicans best chance at redemption at this point.
Smart move by both Obama and Clinton. They are disarming traitor Rove's right wing and the msm's falsely created rift. Rove wants to create a split in the Democratic party based on race. What Rove forgets is that Democrats are not racist, sexist, bigots like him.
why don;' we just forget about these jokes of candidates HIllary and Obama and elect the true change candidate - John Edwards? As far as I am concerned hillary and oblama can bicker all they want ...america wants change...but not the kind when you replace corporate republicans with corporate democrats like oblama or hillary...go john edwards!
This summed up what was going on:
http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w315/pehpsi/1.jpg
as far as Mr Kucinich,...dorry Dennis..I liked you, but you lost all my respect after you tried to support Obama instead of Edwards....I do not trust you anymore
Maybe Barack can throw the media off by showing some cleavage next week. Does Rudy have an American Flag bra?
Andy @ 21:
lol
true candidate of change....that's a good one
they can take any road they want, I won't be voting for either.
How long will the "truce" last? Until the next surrogate shoots of his/her mouth. Will Hillary and Bill go down without a fight? Not likely. Will Obama surrogates go on the attack? Very likely. Edwards is the one that could benefit.
lopaloo102 @ 25:
hell yeah he is....he is the only one not accepting money from special interest groups like obama and hillary do...do you think that anything whatsoever is going to change with hillary or obama? lol yeah right
Can the "SEEK AND DESTROY" debris from these campaigns be ignored? No.
Both Senators should make a public apology to each other and to all Americans for any "misunderstood"
comments made by themselves or staffers and supporters.
Tonight's debate is important. Stop Tim Russert and/or Brian Williams from exploiting this ugly matter. Put an end to it now.
And I don't care who was first in offering the campaign PEACE. It is not important.
JUST DO IT AND GET ON WITH THE IMPORTANT ISSUES FACING OUR COUNTRY.
NO MORE "SEEK AND DESTROY" MISSIONS AGAINST EACH OTHER.
And FIRE any staffer who goes against this policy.
GET TO IT!
Andy @ 21:
I am looking forward to voting for Edwards on Feb. 5.
He has a chance if the MSM does their job and includes Edwards in the conversation.
Midwest Maggie @ 29:
I have another idea..let Hillary and Oblama fight it out more..while in the meantime we'll all go and elect John Edwards!
I supported Richardson and I have not made a decision about who I will vote for in the primary. Richardson said that he will continue to work for the party within the Latino community. One to make a bet that Hillary and Barack will be kissing Richardson's butt to get his support? Richardson has NOT endorsed another candidate. Smart move on his part.
The problem with Senators running for president is that all of them have votes that I find unacceptable. The last time a Senator was voted in as President was John F Kennedy. All the other presidents have been either governors or vice presidents. What this means in November? I don't know. Just saying.
@Andy
Edwards jumped at the chance to roll around in the mud when Coulter teased him like a little boy... and he responded in kind (like a little boy), knowing that a good wrestle with a buxom blonde would get him lots of dough, and it did.....he's all talk
Let's all keep in mind what happened in this instance--- Clinton and the press tried to drag Obama into the mud.....they almost got him (his wife kinda jumped in yesterday morning)...but he displayed the leadership unique to his candidacy, and stayed away from the porkers
Kucinich.
Kucinich. Kucinich.
I like what he says. i like what he stands for. Then he floats the idea of being a running mate with Ron Paul. Then he supports Obama.
Edwards is looking better every day.
Obama added, "I may disagree with Senator Clinton and Senator Edwards on how to get there, but we share the same goals…."
On one hand, it's nice for him to mention Edwards, which Clinton has avoided, especially on Sunday when she flat-out said it was a two-person race. On the other hand, the mere suggestion that Edwards has been involved in the race and gender mud-slinging is uncool.
I guess, as an Edwards supporter, I have to take what I can get. But I have to wonder how many people asked "why is Obama using Hillary Clinton's last name and Teddy Kennedy's first name when talking about who has been the best for minorities?"
I am begining to feel an Edwards surge a coming.
Only because Obama took the high road and Hillary had no choice but to follow; otherwise she looks more and more like the tool she is.
That attempt to make veiled racist attacks on Obama blew up in her face, and the man graciously gave her a way to save face.
I wouldn't have been so gracious, and the ReThugs wouldn't have been, either.
She better be glad it's Obama and not a pissant like Chris Matthews she's campaigning against.
lopaloo102 @ 34:
edwards wife responded to coulter pretty good....but anyway who cares?
obama will not represent what he is claiming to represent once he is elected because of all the numerous corporate contributions he accepted. Don't you think that the first step to fighting corruption shoudl be to stop accepting money from corporations????
and then also obama wants to sit down with insurance companies to figure our healthcare problem out...lol he is such a joke..I'd rather hillary be the president then or even a republican then this liar of a change candidate barak oblama
The more I see Barack Obama's tactics and the more I see the attitudes of his followers the more I think he is a dangerous man. I've noticed that his supporters have one theme they harp on constantly: He didn't vote for war, so I'm voting for him. Just like W's people who constantly said: He talks publicly about his faith, that's all I need to know.
These people totally don't look at the fact that no one voted for war, Senators voted for a war resolution that did not give Bush carte blanche.
He's done a total Swift Boat job on Clinton, then he announces to the world that "Hillary Clinton's politics are not good for our party." Well, thank you very much Mr. King of the World for DICTATING to every Democratic voter. A responsible candidate might say I don't like her politics or I hope you'll vote for me, but Obama DECLARES that Hillary Clinton isn't good for America. Then he accuses her of Rovian tactics.
Interestingly, he isn't getting the vote of registered Democrats, he's getting Republicans and Independents (Republicans by another name).
xoites defends Constitution @ 35:
Yeah Kucinich really disappointed me lately with his support for a fake change candidate Oblama. go edwards!
xoites defends Constitution @ 37:
lol....i sure hope not....if edwards surges, mccain will be in the whitehouse
xoites defends Constitution @ 24:
I'm sure he does, but he might not have pumps to go with that look.
Good for Hillary and Barack. It's not just the far right who would be happy to see these two engage in MAD.
lopaloo102 @ 34:
It is a lie that Clinton dragged Obama into the mud, that's his deceitful ploy, putting on the face of civility while he is Swift Boating the competition. The main trouble with Obama people is that if anyone tells the truth about him, they call that dragging him in the mud. W all over again.
lopaloo102 @ 42:
lol lopaloo102./...edwards is the only candidate who can beat any republican. I am sorry to say that but he is not a woman and not a black man..yes I know it sounds bad, but let';s face it ther eare still bunch of rednecks in the south who will NEVER vote for a woman or a black man..especially the one with middle name hussein.
go edwards! the true message and ACTION of change..not just blah blah blah like obama and then turn around accept another million from insurance company
lopaloo102 @ 42:
I really don't think there is a Republican out there who can beat a Democrat out here with the exception of Hillary.
Ian @ 17:
And I hope that everyone noticed that Obama didn't act until polls showed Edwards rise in Nevada. To make Obama out to be some kind of leader in this is stunningly naive, and stunningly naive is not code for anything.
Dahgrostab'ph-r-i @ 3:
Another gross exaggeration from a totally biased person. Right after 9/11, the Democrats were in a precarious position, they couldn't be seen to be soft on national security (we'd lost 3000 people, remember?). It was a difficult time. Barack Obama crucifies Hillary over this issue when he was not faced with that hard decision and he later voted in favor of every bill to support the war and actually said that he approved Bush's prosecution of the war, so now, how is she a war hawk and he's a saint? Lies, all lies from people unable to tell the difference or acknowledge the difference.
xoites defends Constitution @ 37:
Here is one solution to that feeling: linky.
kaT @ 45:
you might check the timeline on this....this all started with clinton making some dumb comment about LBJ and MLK. And she did it on Fox news taboot (was she pandering to the kooks?..hmmm)
that's what set it off, and obama never chimed in until after russert on sunday....that is after clinton spent a good hour spinning nonsense...
this was a combo of mudslinging by the clintons (fairytale, MLK/LBJ), and the press trying to create hoopla around it...obama was never party to it
I have been invited to go see Edwards speak on Thursday. I guess i will be going.
Yeah, its a shame about Richardson. Probably the most competent and able of all of them and yet the guy couldn't run a decent campaign to save his life.
debaser71 @ 4:
The Reich-wing media bobbleheads have distorted everything they've said. They've been like the Romans in the Coliseum all week.
These behaviors only upset the Dems base and make repiglicans happy.
Just one example - Bill never said Barak's campaign was a "fairytale" - the remark was taken completely out of context - but for Michelle to get up and demand an apology was precipitous and probably propelled by the fact that the media was deliberately reporting the comment incorrectly.
So everyone has been acting badly and it's good to see them back off, take a deep breath, and - hopefully - start over again.
Do we really want to do the repiglicans job FOR them? I don't think so. Time for everyone to act like an adult with an adult's understanding.
*
xoites defends Constitution @ 52:
yep go edwards! no to corporate democrats like hillary and oblama
lopaloo102 @ 18:
Obama started the race crap, not Hillary.
xoites defends Constitution @ 37:
If it turns out to just be "nature's call" then watch out for toe tappers.
kaT @ 56:
while those 2 idiots bicker about race...john edwards talks about issues...vote john edwards!
lopaloo102 @ 51:
That "dumb" comment was almost an exact quote of what i was taught in grade school. It was the commonly accepted party line (this particular party being guilty white people) speech about Civil Rights we all got as kids. It is a shame Hillary thinks people all think that way still, but i can at least figure out where she got it.
xoites defends Constitution @ 52:
don't forget to take a barf bag
lol :-)
xoites defends Constitution @ 59:
your boy edwards thought it was dumb too
lopaloo102 @ 60:
I reserve that for special folks.
Looking for it right now...
Kinder, gentler words do not excuse Hillary's machine-gun racism.
Steve Benen writes:
This is more classic Clintonian pandering:
Hillary speaks out of both sides of her mouth.
Where does this first-strike warmonger get off telling us that Martin Luther King Jr. -- a non-violent peace activist Christian with moral courage and real leadership -- shares her ideals?
Hillary and MLK have very little in common.
Hillary and GWB, on the other hand, have much in common.
DARE TO COMPARE THE LIES AND DECEIT:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Statement by the President
Today I have signed into law H.J. Res. 114, a resolution "To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq." . . . The debate over this resolution in the Congress was in the finest traditions of American democracy. There is no social or political force greater than a free people united in a common and compelling objective. It is for that reason that I sought an additional resolution of support from the Congress to use force against Iraq, should force become necessary.
-- GEORGE W. BUSH, THE WHITE HOUSE, October 16, 2002.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq
I believe the facts that have brought us to this fateful vote are not in doubt. Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members. . . . It is clear that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. . . . If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, then we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise. [A] unilateral attack...cannot be ruled out. . . . This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make -- any vote that may lead to war should be hard -- but I cast it with conviction. . . . It is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation.
-- HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, October 10, 2002
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Memo to Steve Benen: How do you reconcile all of that with MLK?
Which part of Hillary's distortion of the ideals of her hero MLK six years after her "conviction" for a "unilateral attack" do you find "encouraging"?
Since when did MLK become the rode model for imperial pre-emptive war against Muslims and Arabs?
xoites defends Constitution @ 52:
It's not an open event? Where have we seen this before? ;)
peaceful easy feeling @ 64:
Oh, it is open. I am now living in Nevada.
kaT @ 40:
Don't be so quick to discount who will be voting for Obama. As I stated earlier, I haven't made up my mind, yet and there are many other Richardson supporters that haven't reached a decision, either. So the field is still open. Who will Richardson supporters vote for? Obama? Clinton? Edwards? Kucinich? or write-in Richardson? Richardson received 5% of the vote and it's this 5% that could make the difference in who wins the primary.
media is complicit in only trying to elect either corporate democrat hillary or corporate democrat obama. since they raised the most money, they will be spending it on advertising on their TV networks, hence they are not interested in edwards, kucinich or others winning or even participating in the debates since they did not raise that much money. see how it all ties together? time to end supporting corporate democrats and listen to the media who tries to convince us who we should elect.
go edwards!
Andy @ 67:
maybe it is time to stop electing those who media wants to win
vrk @ 53:
Given how American (twice!) went for a ticket with a "daddy" figure VP balancing a younger and more impetuous preznit, and given how Democrats are behaving more and more like Republicans, I wouldn't count Richardson out of the race in the fall. If you have someone from Illinois or an anti-carpet-bagger (now) in New York, you'll need someone from the south or south-west. Even someone from the Atlantic states could use a south-westerner. And any help with Hispanics is always a plus.
With that said, I agree about his campaigning. But as long as he gets it into his head that the Soviet Union is sooooo 1980s, he'd be useful in the debates.
Andy @ 67:
Exactly. That has much to do with it.
Just ONE more reason for campaign Finance Revolution.
lopaloo102 @ 42:
Andy at #46 is right. In matchup polls, Edwards is the only Democrat who beats all the Republican candidates, with the exception of a tie with Giuliani.
You must have missed this.
xoites defends Constitution @ 70:
yeah...go public campaign finance!
anney @ 71:
thanks nice link
NDIB @ 48:
Yes. Barak and Hillary have been pissing me off royally. It's all such bullshit. Don't they know they're upsetting their base?
*
*
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080115/ap_on_bi_ge/citigroup Off Topic,but you might want to read this.......and with regards to the topic.........about damn time!I hate it when Dems act like repugs......ok,ok.....so maybe they weren't acting exactly like repugs....but you get my meaning.
The guy after Olbermann had a good commentary of the media distorting what candidates said.
JTM @ 36:
Andy @ 68:
Seele @ 76:
Dan Abrams - he had a good discussion about this fabricated "Race" issue. The msm is following traitor Rove's instructions to a T.
lopaloo102 @ 42:
Don't bet on that.
KKKaT @ 40:
yeah! tell it like you see it.
I'm amazed at all the candidate trashing going on in this thread. Look, come November, we are going to need to get behind a candidate that will replace the Republican crap that currently "rules" this country with an iron fist. So let's be civil.
Andy @ 67:
too clever by half, andy
--media witnessed edwards flop in 04, to an incompent boob (bush) (and the whole world knew it then)....
--media knows edwards is a gazillionaire who prattles on about the plight of the poor....everyone is put off somewhat by such flagrant hypocrisy (sorta like a vitters or a limbaugh or some other nut talking about family values, divorced 3 times, cheating)
--media knows edwards is a dc insider who voted to authorize force in iraq,
Sometimes, the media gets it right
Andy @ 67:
Judging by the donor breakdown, Edwards and Obama are similarly "corporate" or "grassroots."
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/donordems.asp?cycle=2008
Sort of reminds me of the old plot line of the two guys chasing one gal and fighting each other all the way. Always trying to make the other look bad. In the end she chooses...
...a third guy who was not making a fool of himself.
Andy @ 68:
It's not the media that frightens me. It is the phony peacenik ideas of some candidates and their ignorant supporters. All we really know about Barack Mohammed Hussein Obama is that he was educated in a madrassa. How are we supposed to win the Global War On Terror with an avowed Jihadist-sympathizer with the name "Mohammed Hussein"? Hillary is the only presidential candidate on the Democrat side that I respect. (I am still deciding between supporting Hillary, John McCain or Rudy Giuliani.) Hillary and Joe Lieberman are the only serious Democrats with the courage to stand side-by-side with the president and make the tough decisions to attack another nation unilaterally. That takes courage and bold leadership.
Hillary-Lieberman '08.
right wing hater @ 9:
As I recall, the repugs own the media, who moderate the debates and repugs own Diebold, which controls the elections. As new Hampshire proves, the debates mean as much as a vote on a Diebold machine.
Jose @ 86:
EAT SHIT AND DIE!
Jose @ 86:
lopaloo102 @ 83:
- yeah he is rich...so is hillary, so is romney, and your point is? gore is rich too by the way, but he does so much good. the point is what he wants to do. and do not forget that he was the one standing up to the corporations defending people like you and me in court, that is how he made his millions. He has proven by his track record that he defends middle class, unlike obama who has no record of anything except blah blah blah. he speaks good, but that's about all he is going to do.
- everybody is a dc insider in the race, even obama once he accepted millions from insurance companies will be a dc insider. the point is who is going to really change anything. since edwards did not accept contributions like obama and hillary he has more freedom to do what he preaches unlike obama who is going to bend over after ceo of anthem calls him and reminds him about that check he gave him when he ran for president.
- do not forget that obama ditched most of the votes in the senate and then came out in the debates and said how he would not vote for this or that even after he did NOT vote himself (iran amendment). so talk about leadership there ditching the votes...at least edwards and hillary admit they made a mistake. It is easy to ditch the vote and then pick the most favorable vote position like obama. what a joke of a candidate.
Oh please!! Are you seriously THAT naive?
It's practically a commandment in the establishment... Say one thing, do another.
kaT @ 40:
Ya, ya, ya.....we know....you're a Hillary supporter regardless what anyone says.
So how are the Obama supporters going to win my vote? How are the Edwards supporters going to win my vote? How are the Hillary supporters going to win my vote? The more trash I hear, the more likely I will vote for the candidate that is being trashed. I need to hear positive statements. I don't approve 100% of any of the Senator's voting record. What I do hear from Obama is the message of hope and unity. What I hear from Edwards is that it's time to stop supporting corporate interests. What I hear from Kucinich is "save the Constitution of the US." These are all good messages. This country has been extremely damaged by traitor Rove and traitor Cheney and the sociopath Bush and we need healing. Trashing candidates is Rove's and Murdoch's game. Let's be better than that.
Jose @ 86:
If HRC gets the Nomination ...yeah... ok.....but Lieberman? It'll be McCain/ Lieberman on the gop ticket......oh....and atleast you were honest with your assessment...but your comment about Obama makes you look racist.....and rather ignorant as well.
peaceful easy feeling @ 84:
edwards donations are mostly from PRIVATE citizens (lawyers etc) not from corporate groups or organizations.
Personally, at such a moment I would have avoided using the word "tit."
Jose @ 86:
Jose - vote for Rudy. He's the only candidate that will save your arse from another 9/11 attack.
once again, the media keeps those two corporatists in the headlines. Edwards can't get a lick of coverage. proof to me that they are really on a fearful tear against him.
kaT @ 56:
baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!! baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!! Good little sheeple.
Jose @ 86:
jose, just to correct you factually
his name is barak hussein obama....there is no mohammed..that was thrown in there by the right wing radio nuts
Some songs you might enjoy:
"I Am Just A Lonely Synapse In George W. Bush's Brain", "Househusband Macho!", "Gouge 'Em 'Till They Bleed", "These Are The Ones Who Die", "Lullabye For A Child In War" . . . . http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=170140
ConcernedCanuck @ 99:
If you were actually concerned you would not compare people with sheep. If you were actually Canadian you would realize this is not your election.
ConcernedCanuck @ 92:
he supports billary because MURDICKKK SUPPORTS BILLARY
Jose @ 86:
somebody who still says that Liebermann is a democrat needs some serious medical treatment. can somebody please kick him out of the party?
lopaloo102 @ 100:
Actually it is Barack despite his name being mispelled "Barak" on 2000 ballots in Florida.
DAVID BAUDER
AP Television Writer
Subject: Article
Chris Matthews a target for Clinton fans
Dear Mr. Bauder,
Read your article about Chris Matthews with a great deal of encouragement and positive excitement, so much that I feel compelled to complement you on ideals of an Internet trend that is shaping the citizenry, called “transparency”. So simple here citizens can openly challenge issues such as media Journalist that have had the power to shape society without question, but now in a growing trend citizens with some vision, can help to improve life for everyone by participating in the process.
The free Internet we know now, where one could challenge and analyze our culture while in motion is very extraordinary, rivaling, and flushing out a government that has ascended to a central control, but is slowly with anguish, and leveraged emotions giving way to the electromagnetic spectrum, that public domain it is operating in. Simply put self regulation in television and radio Journalism is way over due. But, most striking are the champions that have the courage within the system that have been burned for decades to be able to come forward and just say. Geez..Luoooo..eeeZ, we have been screwing things up for too long, lets try to change and do it with dignity. To me you made that point in your article whether your for Hillary or not you have shown the bias that is prevalent through out the Mainstream Media industry.
For decades I have listens across spectrum of political analysis beginning from eighties with the introduction of Rush Limbaugh, and now others like “Hate Radio Hannity”, LOL, totally astounds me here this guy openly rants to do everything in his power to prevent a candidate, Hillary, from being elected, then continuously rants as to why Hillary or Democrats decline to interview with him.
So funny, then for years America is morphed into television cable news Journalist split screen and round robin forums, all plugged in with secret ear pieces recieving orders from the corporate collective to create a mental petition expertly carved crafted contextual directives. Here Word Smiths can convolute a lie, a bias, hatred, or dodge discovery in deceit to meaning that appears into something which is what America needs or not need. Chris Matthews is one of many hosts that are expert in, spattering, while spitting out his Foulball. America is finding out that Chris Matthews is in a similar sense a some what like able IMUS type. Driving through the News Medium contracted to create controversy. These Journalist types are nothing more than corporate mercenaries, highly paid that are given a chance to hit a high fly ball to sacrifice the advance in the game.
One thing is for sure, after my studies this past year finding out Andrea Mitchell, the blonde gal that appears on Chris Matthews Hardball is the wife of Allen Greenspan, privy to the knowledge of Fed interest rate moves!! Yikes. Here America has daily to weekly analysis from a “Passionate Conservative” all these years. Imagine all the insider funny business that is our creepy economy, tied this whole MSNBC structure. One understands why to get Keith going on with those worst persons awards. The distraction is to keep America away from the Best Connection in the world. Hey, Andrea when are those interest rates going up? Please don’t tell its not happening.
Im just a joe six pack
Jose @ 86:
Peace worshipers are a problem, yes, but your reasoning is a bit convoluted.
xoites defends Constitution @ 102:
Oh please. Read these damn posts. Hillary supporters sound like goddamn republicans.
This story was manufactured by the media to make cover for George's trip to the middle east. The fact that we are giving the Saudi's billions for the arms deal fell under the radar. thank's MSM.
P.D. @ 109:
I was thinking it was to hide the fact that Bush is over there and where he is, so he doesn't get Bhutto'd.
Andy @ 95:
Proof?
Obama has '99 problems' no wonder they're crying for a truce.
ConcernedCanuck @ 108:
Sorry, i just hate that term, "sheeple."
can somebody tell me please why CORPORATE media "news" outlets like cnn, faux, msnbc have the right to hold PUBLIC debates during election season. Isn't there an obvious conflict of interest that the media companies are only interested in those candidates who raised the most money and they will be spending that money on their networks advertising. Media will try to influence the whole election process like they did by keeping kucinich out and ron paul.
I call for campaign reforms where debates can only be held on PUBLIC television, say PBS, etc. These corporate "news" networks even have the guts to influence our election process..where are the courts!
peaceful easy feeling @ 111:
scroll down to the edwards chart and you will see that 99% of his money are individual contributions - http://chawedrosin.wordpress.com/2008/01/06/who-finances-candidates-camp...
it is time to get off the obama bandwagon and support the true candidate of change, don't you think?
lopaloo102 @ 42:
Actually, Edwards matches up VERY well against McCain.
http://firedoglake.com/2008/01/14/the-polls-you-wont-hear-much-about/
Andy @ 114:
I disagree. Those airwaves belong to us. They should be held on all the networks. The networks should pay for them, but the candidates should just talk to each other and no moderator should be present.
That would be the most informative way to do it.
xoites defends Constitution @ 113:
I don't blame you, sorry meself, but reading the exact same repeated mantra over and over is almost like watching Faux News. Every talking point some pinhead pundit has uttered, seems to get into every thread that has Hillary in it. It compares with the elections that Bush won/stole, and how his supporters acted. It makes people that post that way sound like they are nothing more than trolls.
Like Dan Abrams said last night, most of this was fueled by the media.
ConcernedCanuck @ 118:
They are just too used to watching TV. Let's hope they get over it before it kills us.
xoites defends Constitution @ 117:
well I agree if that would only work..unfortunately, the corporate news media will always try to influence the debate/election process even if we allow them to continue to participate. we need strong supervision and hopefully more people like kucinich wil be suing them for what they do.
Steve, you write--
What about the liberal silence spreading disinformation and fanning flames of racism at Ron Paul? Is silence in the face of deceit the right way to go? Or is it acceptable if we're the ones inventing and/or regurgitating the lies and directing the venom at the other side? That's fair ball?
As soon as I saw fake liberals attacking Paul with lies and psy-op disinformation, I knew it was only a matter of time before Dem campaigns would start using the same accusations of racism as a weapon to kneecap each another.
Why? Because calling your opponent a "racist" is a weapon that works. It costs nothing to call somebody a racist, yet requires all the time and energy of the accused to fight it. And then, even if the charge doesn't stick, you still get to derail the other candidates campaign, and come out the other side of it with liberal commentariat patting you on the back and telling voters you took the high road. Huh? Come again!
Yelling "racist" in a crowded liberal marketplace is like throwing raw red meat to hyenas. The claws come out and the snarling and growling and territorial fighting starts instantaneously, like an involuntary chemical reaction, with no thought to reality. In many ways, it's an hysterical witch trial akin to invoking the names "Osama" and "September 11" over-and-over-and-over at a Rudy Giuliani rally.
anney @ 71:
Right..... And the polls have been spot on right? Give me a break.
Andy @ 121:
Not if it is law. Not if America takes back the media and puts it in its proper place where it belongs: Serving Americans.
To all you Obamadiers- Bartcop.com is requesting your input-
1) "Could I get an Obama backer to write in and tell me how you're confortable with Obama when the unprincipled bastards like the New York Whore Times, plus the MSM and FOX News and Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly are all pulling for the guy?"
2) "Can anybody tell me what Obama stands for? Please don't send me links - do your own thinking. And don't say "change," because everyone but Bush wants change. If you plan to vote for Obama, shouldn't you know what he stands for?"
Go ahead, make his day. http://www.bartcop.com
havent you had enough yet? enough of these war mongers, politicians that base thier policys on what the corporations want not what you want or this country needs? enough of bushes crapy government ? now bush is crying to opec that the price of oil is to high , i thought he had so many buddys in the mid east, that were going to keep oil prices low, well anyway im asking you have you had enough of politicians getting in the lobbiests pocket , the corporations pockets , if you have how can you justify voteing for clinton or obama? clintons said thiers nothing wrong with takeing apac or lobbiest or corporations money , obama takes just a little less corporation money but when they offer it he will suck every dollar up he can, both are hawks on iran , hillarys said she will bring some troops home from iraq , but shes going to leave enough to defend that embassy in iraq to protect our interests , shes going to leave enough to defend thoes twelve bases we made in iraq , shes going to leave enough troops there to train more iraqys and enough to have a quick reaction force to repell any insurgency from alkida or what have you , so that only leaves about fifty guys comeing home , she has stated thier will still be troops in iraq untill the end of her second term, so whats the deal ? if shes going to further george w bushes policys what the hells her change consist of? obama made one good speach at the democratic convention since thier hes been talking change , well if hes going to change anything how about refuseing corporation money its a start, this craps not going to change untill the voters smarten up, being a first woman or first black to inhabit the whitehouse is no reason to support a candidate , especially if they take corporation money, ill take either kucinich or edwards neither take lobbiest money and they both have promised to restore our civil rights , you have not heard clinton or obama tell you your civil rights will be given back to you by them, corporations suck you dry !!!!!!!!give us somebody who will take them on , and let clinton and obama cut each others throuts for the left overs!!!!!!
diamondmc @ 123:
America will find out if/when an honest recount is done in New Hampshire.
xoites defends Constitution @ 124:
I think there should be NO corporate news networks period...corporate other channels ok, but not news...screw that
buzz @ 125:
Maybe I'm missing something, but I see more of the Hill and Bill show on the MSM, than I do Obama.
Cats r Flyfishn @ 97:
Hillary was saying the same thing last week, when the nuke attack comes to New York, Obama won't be ready, but she will be. Rudy and Hillary's platforms are very similar, I am still trying to decide which one is preferrable. I might be leaning to Hillary, because I think it's the Democrats turn, and a vote for Hillary is almost the same as a vote for Rudy. Hillary seems like the best compromise between Giuliani and McCain.
Roger Ramjet II @ 122:
I have not been silent about Ron Paul. I read what was in his newsletter. If he wrote it he is a Racist. If it was ghost written his name was on it year after year after year and he is a racist. If he wrote it and did not mean it he is a liar. Take your pick. Either way he is not to be President of the US.
Bye bye, Ron Paul.
buzz @ 125:
yeah really ObLama supporters...do not forget that Obama also said that impeachment is OFF the table...he is a joke and nothing is going to CHANGE with him. I'd rather have a republican or hillary be president because I know what to expect from them,. but obama is just words..no action.
go edwards!
Andy @ 115:
Same for Obama (99%), according to your link.
finally we can get back to the issues
With regard to the next Democratic debate and party unity, I would love it if the following happened:
When the "moderator" pitches a question that assumes that the surge is working, the Democrats should calmly all refuse to take the bait. Each should repeat the same question back at the moderator: "how many of the 18 benchmarks have been met?"
None of them can risk doing this alone. The M$M would eat that person alive, a la Ron Paul. But if they all did it together, lum day la roo might actually notice and then ask the same question of Bush.
peaceful easy feeling @ 133:
yeah..and don't forget to compare his stance on issues to edwards...he is all pro corporate obama...let's just all elect hillary then...same thing
White Privilege:
We control the game, we have the cards (including the race card), we decide who plays in the game.
Now Hillary is going to take the high road in case any of you thin-skinned AA's want to play the race card.
Let's all get along.....after all.....we're all Democrats, right?
If Hillary is the nominee, all the AA's will vote for the Democratic nominee, right?
Right.
Roger Ramjet II @ 122:
I never thought anyone would try to mix oil and water......hows that workin out for ya...........clueless.
xoites defends Constitution @ 124:
Mmmm, one could only wish. Faux news and Limbaugh and Hannity think that they own the radio waves. And apparently, so does the FCC.
ConcernedCanuck @ 129:
No you're not missing anything. You've hit the nail right on the head. The MSM attacks the Clintons religously while giving Obama a pass. This should be a no-brainer.
This just in.
Barak Obama is not Jesus Christ (although he thinks he will lead Jesus to America).
He is an empty suit with no record and no real plans for America.
I am so sick of this Dean like fury for him. Believe me here in the middle of the country where this election will be decided, he does not have a chance if he is the nominee. You may not like it but no way are the swing states going to vote for him over any republican.
queens & kings @ 137:
You sir, need to chickitty check yaself before ya wrek yaself.
SickofObama @ 141:
Oh, YOU get to decide!
Eat me!
SickofObama @ 141:
you are right! let's all vote for real candidate with real change plans - john edwards!
all obama supporter will be so disppointed if he is elected because nothing is going to change
xoites defends Constitution @ 143:
I will tell you one thing right now. If Obama gets the nomination i don't care which Republican they dig up and fill full of Framaldhied and stick a flag pin on. Obama will win!
ConcernedCanuck @ 127:
What a waste of time. The way dems are killing themselves, the repugs could elect bozo the clown and win. Will dems ever learn to stop eating themselves? Obama, Hillary, Edwards are all insiders. They all are mainstream party people. There is very little differance between any of them when it comes to policy. Repugs are just sitting back and letting dems destroy any chance we have of winning. All you have to do is, look at the hatered that comes from dems on this site against other dems. Repugs must be feeling pretty good right now.
Clinton/Obama '08!
diamondmc @ 146:
In your wildest dreams.
"Mommy mommy!
Vote for the man in the dress!"
"No, mommy! Vote for the man in the Magic Underwear!"
"No Mommy! Vote for the guy who wants a Theocracy!"
Yeah, they will cream the Dems alright!
xoites defends Constitution @ 145:
Comments are closed on this entry