I am totally sick of the media talking about "race" when they talk about the democratic candidates. They say that it is sad that race has come into the picture. Well, the media are the only ones I have heard talk about race. They keep stirring the pot toward "race" to create something to talk about. I do not believe most Americans are focused on that one subject, but if the media has their way, sadly, they may be.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fh8DjrKSlwk

Obama is too black and Edward is too angry-
they sure want Hillary to win! yet polls after polls look as if Edward and Obama way ahead of Hillary. Makes you think that they want those issue to be an issue.

another polls suggest that Hillary is easy to beat by an Republican.

paranoia, I'm curious as to what polls you watch! I keep a close eye on polls every single day for over a year. Hillary has a huge lead nationally. Fla and Mich both say repeatedly they feel SURE they'll be seated at the convention in Denver and Hillary has a huge lead in these high delegate states.

Also nationally, any dem beats the reps. Yeh, McCain is close in a couple polls but come on, we have months to go, he's an old old fart and his campaign is just awful... any dem will take him down easily.

What has happened in the repub party? Now two of the candidates have movie stars supporting them. I thought the repubs didn't like Hollywood types. Okay both of these "stars" are pretty much washed up, in my opinion, but still.

Re David Seaton's news link.

Couldn't agree more that a post-modern (whatever that means) coup d'etat has effectively stripped George W. Bush of power over foreign (and maybe domestic) policy.

There have been other coups in the U.S. Viz, the John Kennedy assassination and the forced resignation of Richard Nixon.

The current coup is very troubling. It suggests strongly democracy has been taken from the American people without their knowing it.

IMO, anyone who sees the political arena as just Dems vs. Repubs is overlooking some strong danger signals.

ConcernedCanuck @ 8:

JW @ 2:

I dont know how many times Ive told people that Hillary is not running for prom queen. Nice to see someone else noticed the reasons the simple minded hate her, and how they actually apply regarding her quallifications for President.

What qualifications? Seriously. What ones? She's a lawyer. Became a very successful lawyer AFTER her husband's political career took off. She was First Lady. Tried to do something with healthcare, but was forces to slither back to doing what First Lady's do, reading to 3 and 4 year olds. She then ran for senate. Won. Voted WITH the Republicans on everything. Oh, she did bring forth legislation to battle those evil video games. But other than that, what are her qualifications? Everyone talks about how qualified she is, and all this experience but nobody shows where/how. Mingling with the politicians for 35 years, or whatever her magic number is does what? Oh, right, it gives her connections to lobbyists and corporations. Isn't that EXACTLY what you have now?

Thank you!

Ron @ 10:

Hubris @ 4:

This video on Obama, has anyone seen it or wonder why media hasn't touched on it?
http://politicaldiscontent.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-wont-any-of-media-to...

I mean we know tv cable news is biased in favor of Obama, they handle him with kid gloves and they do everything they can think of to smear Hillary.

My question is, that if this guy is lying, why would he show his face? Why hasn't Obama had the video removed or sued the guy?

Sorry, i have no problem with pot and I might even be able to over look someone who used harder drugs in their youth (maybe), but if he's used it in the last few years, as an adult, as a married man with kids, as a politician, than it is fair game that the media should be all over this story if they give a damn about this country.

I would guess that the MSM would get the same impression I got. The guy doesn't look like he could be a limo driver, let alone own one. He just doesn;t look legitimate. Why would you think that kind of crap should be all over the media. The MSM is crappy enough as it is.

Anyone could make a video like that. Probably hasn't been taken down or objected to because either Obama's people don't know about it or they won't dignify it with any sort of response. It looks like a piece of trash to me.

Thanks for the link Mike! You are the best...

pissed off patricia @ 1:

I am totally sick of the media talking about "race" when they talk about the democratic candidates. They say that it is sad that race has come into the picture. Well, the media are the only ones I have heard talk about race. They keep stirring the pot toward "race" to create something to talk about. I do not believe most Americans are focused on that one subject, but if the media has their way, sadly, they may be.

And after the MSM gets rid of that madrassa-educated, Koran-swearing, muslim, islamo-fascist, not-black-enough, BARAK FARRAKHAN HUSSEIN OBAMA and after they get their corporate-sponsored girl shillary as the nominee, GENDER will be the continuing ongoing topic, so that every sigh will be a weakness and the PLAYING FIELD will be tilted to give her an opportunity to compete in a MAN's WORLD. Her CLEAVAGE and HEMLINE will be or will NOT be PRESIDENTIAL. And maybe she'll also be judged on whether or not people would want to HAVE A BEER WITH HER. Because after they install her as the Dem Candidate, they'll demonize her like Gore and Kerry.

But since diebold chooses your president, it won't matter anyway.
You'll still end up choosing between a repig and a repig-lite.

Hubris @ 4:

pathetic! really!

Why do civil rights heroes cheer 'Rezko card'?
Obama's what they fought for, but they've got Clintons' backs

January 24, 2008
BY MARY MITCHELL Sun-Times Columnist
COLUMBIA, S.C.-I happened to catch a piece of the round-the-clock primary campaign coverage, and who did I see in the front row at the recent CNN debate? Georgia U.S. Rep. John Lewis shaking his head in agreement when Sen. Hillary Clinton gave Sen. Barack Obama a real tongue-lashing. Surreal. How did an iconic figure from the civil rights era, a man who was beaten upside his head by out-of-control police officers in Selma, Ala., end up carrying a white woman's water in a race against a black man who epitomizes everything civil rights activists worked to gain? Clinton had lambasted Obama for legal work he did for Tony Rezko, a now-disgraced Chicago developer who contributed generously to a lot of Illinois politicians, including Obama. Rezko is set to go on trial for public corruption and fraud charges Feb. 25. The Obama campaign has given about $84,000 of tainted Rezko donations to charity. During the debate, Clinton accused Obama of having done legal work for "your contributor ... in his slum landlord business in inner-city Chicago." Given that the Clintons presided over a scandal-plagued White House, seeing Lewis co-signing Clinton's in-your-face attack on Obama's character was mind-boggling.

Really, if Obama had done in the Illinois General Assembly what Bill Clinton did in the Oval Office, white folks would have chased him out of office and barred the door. Curious contradictio. But former U.N. Ambassador Andrew Young, himself a foot soldier in the civil rights movement, can now "clown" about "Bill being every bit as black as Obama" and probably having "slept with more black women than Obama." And black luminaries such as Earvin "Magic" Johnson, Vernon Jordan and U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) are using their iconoclastic status to put the Clintons back in the White House. Hillary, a lawyer herself, knows full well that an associate doesn't call the shots when it comes to fat-cat clients. They file appearances and stay up all night writing briefs that the firm's partners take credit for.

The truth is, over several years early in his career, Obama did "five to seven hours of billable work" on projects linked to Rezko-not Rezko himself, according to Obama's former law firm. What galls me the most is not Hillary's remarks, but the fact that so many powerful black men have lined up behind her despite her reputation for playing loose with the facts. For instance, on March 12, 2007, after Hillary's speech in Selma, Sun-Times columnist Robert Novak noted a curious contradiction. "[T]he real problem with her visit there a week ago concerned her March 4 speech's claim of her attachment to Martin Luther King Jr. as a high school student in 1963," Novak wrote. "How, then, could she be a 'Goldwater Girl' in the next year's presidential election? The incompatibility of those two positions of 40 years ago was noted to me by Democratic old-timers shocked by Clinton's temerity in pursuing her presidential candidacy. Barry Goldwater's opposition to the 1964 voting rights bill was not incidental to his run for the White House but an integral element of conscious departure from GOP tradition that contributed to his disastrous performance. "What Clinton said at Selma is significant because it betrays her campaign's panicky reaction to the unexpected rise of Obama as a serious competitor for the Democratic nomination," Novak concluded. So, who is spinning fairy tales? 'Crabs in the barrel'

Although the Clintons have the support of influential blacks, African Americans know the "crabs in the barrel" syndrome when they see it. That's why Hillary Clinton's distortions will likely backfire. Since the Clintons are seasoned campaigners in the black community, the only reason I can think of for Clinton to distort Obama's connection to Rezko would be to turn off Obama's white supporters. Wednesday, former South Carolina Democratic Party Chairman Dick Harpootlian, an Obama supporter, called the Clintons' campaign strategy "reprehensible." And it is. Hillary isn't only playing the "Rezko" card and the "gender" card. She seems to be going for every card in the deck. So while I can appreciate Obama's vow to keep personal attacks out of his campaign ... maybe it's time for him to turn over the Lewinsky card.

I rest my case