He Can’t Handle The Truth
A reporter in Las Vegas had the audacity to call Obama out for his lies and smears concerning his attack ad linking McCain to Cheney, when the truth is that Obama voted FOR the Cheney bill and McCain voted AGAINST it.
It’s obvious that Obama isn’t used to feisty reporters calling bullsh*t on him because rather than answer the charge honestly, he fell back on this cutesy answer:
“I thought I was talking to you instead of debating John McCain, but I am happy to let you serve as his proxy”.
“Serve as his proxy”? So now any reporter not shouting loud hosannahs and grabbing their ankles for Obama is considered a McCain proxy?
This reporter’s name is Jon Ralston and it’s a pity it won’t be independent reporters like him who will be moderating the presidential debates instead of reliable liberals like Tom Brokaw, Bob Schieffer and some PBS person, who are so afraid of making a mistake that might cost Obama the presidency and are terrified of being branded racists.
But such is the state of modern “journalism” and I am happy to report they are being hoist by their own petard. The latest Pew report indicates the public is experiencing severe Obama fatigue/overload due to the massive amounts of press coverage; 67% of Republicans thought there was too much information about Obama; 51% of independents agreed, and surpisingly, even a third (34%) of Democrats thought there was too much coverage of Obama.
It seems his adoring press is killing Obama with kindness.
I am telling you, every passing day, every additional day in the spotlight will cost Obama votes.
Let’s face it – if you are ‘undecided’ at this time, you are only looking for a reason to NOT vote for Obama, as the press has already promoted him to the n-th degree and if an undecided voter has not yet fallen in line (after the press snow-job), then the more the undecided voter learns about the real Obama, the more likely that person either does not vote, or votes for McCain.
Keep talking Barrack..
Comment by tiger woods | August 6, 2008
I had all of Pope Barry the first I could handle before 2006 was over.
Comment by thescoundrel | August 6, 2008
WOW the PUMAs are out for Obama’s blood. Now they are claiming Obamas certificate of birth is forged. Ouch!!
http://tinyurl.com/6l4plp
Comment by thescoundrel | August 6, 2008
If you had OD’d on BO by ‘06, you were waaaay ahead of the curve!
As for the PUMA thing, I saw some poll or survey (or something) today about how Obama had even LESS support among Democrats than McCain had with GOPers. That was a shocker–at least to me. It’s gonna be tricky for Obama on how to handle his “wimmen” problem at the convention.
Comment by qcexaminer | August 7, 2008
Yeah well Pope Barry was one of my first political posts when I was wanting to blog about football!
You want to know the scary part about the PUMA movement? From my readings it happened without a an actual organized movement. It just sort of fell together among dissatisfied Clinton bloggers. That is something politicians have never really had to face before – the quickness that the Internet allows individuals to band together and share information and displeasure. It is also one of the reasons Republicans and Independents are lagging in elections. Too many of them are like McCain, they are not interested or just afraid of the Internet. Political parties need to learn to adapt quicker in the Internet age than they did when they could control media content like the the RI Politburo does here locally. If the local political opposition groups were as savvy at Internet news dispersion as the Kosocialsts the politburo would have trouble hanging on to their power structure.
Comment by thescoundrel | August 7, 2008
You three deluded fools amuse THE ORACLE. Your silly minds still think the scheming of a few bitter Clinton supporters and self appointed swift boat style liars clubs will keep Obama from being elected President. Keep telling yourselves it ain’t over till it’s over Yogi wannabes. Trust me. It’s over for your boy McCain…
Comment by the oracle | August 7, 2008
Oracle – that sounds nice, but why have you avoided commenting on the following…
Any democrat should be winnning the November election in a landslide. The GOP is in the dumper.
However, Obama is in a virtual dead-heat.
Obama was front-page news for 10-days, yet gained no bump.
Ever since the ‘Pastor Disaster’ he could not put away HRC (won only half of the remaining Primaries, even though he was the nominee), and has never led McCain, who (by your comments) is a TERRIBLE candidate.
Why no comment?
Comment by tiger woods | August 7, 2008
Aiiiiieeee! It’s the Attack Of The Oracle Strawman!!!!
I can’t speak for the other deluded fools, but I never said or thought that Obama wouldn’t get the nomination; we deluded fools were merely speculating about how much damage Hillary could/would inflict on Obama.
Let’s get real here—you can never really count the Clintons out—even with a stake driven through their hearts.
Comment by qcexaminer | August 7, 2008
Virtually all of Obama’s press ahs been negative coverage Tiger. News outlets have played and replayed McCains smear ads thousands of times, that’s free negative advertising for McCain Tiger. Right wing propagandists keep spouting the same nonsense about the polls you repeat Buddy. Despite all that, Obama still leads, perhaps not by as much as you think he should Tiger, but he still leads McCain in spite of all the crap spewed by the right.
Comment by the oracle | August 7, 2008
What smear ads??
Comment by Tspud1 | August 7, 2008
This is the same spineless media that was too scared to question Bush and his office all those years. Just think: they could have saved us billions. Calling them “liberal” is misleading, though. They just go for whatever will sell more papers or internet ads. Right now, it happens to be Obama, to the dismay of conservatives everywhere.
Comment by pioneer98 | August 7, 2008
The paris Hilton ad is a good example. But the coolest thing that came out of it was Hilton’s response. How can you support McCain when Paris Hilton is smarter than he is?
Comment by the oracle | August 7, 2008
She is a good example of most Americans…out of touch and ignorant. She didn’t even know McCains name. Kind of like that speaker babe that wrote a book that no one is buying.
Comment by Tspud1 | August 7, 2008
Oh yeah, that’s the ticket O, blame the GOP for Obama’s poor performance in what should be a slam-dunk win for him. That way Obama, and his advisors/ supporters/donors/worshippers/etc. won’t try to figure out what it is about OBAMA that people don’t like and fix it, so he’ll just keep doing the same dumb stuff and end up like Kerry. The Democrats didn’t want to face the fact that Kerry really sucked, so they blamed Rove, Swift-Boats, etc. rather than actually DO something about Kerry’s suckiness.
It was a Win-Win for Bush and it’ll be a Win-Win for McCain if the Dems focus on the McCain and the GOP instead of their own damned candidate.
Comment by qcexaminer | August 7, 2008
pioneer, I don’t agree with you about the press not questioning Bush about the Iraq war. They did the best they could—there competing and conflicting members within the Bush administration, State, CIA, DOD, etc., but Bush was and is ultimately the decider.
How would the press investigate to see if there were actually WMDs in Iraq or not when Saddam didn’t give access to the UN inspectors?
The press did the best they could but wiley ol’ Saddam even had the intelligence agencies of multiple countries bamboozled.
Comment by qcexaminer | August 7, 2008
Oracle,
“Virtually all of Obama’s coverage has been negative”
Are you kidding me?
He had each of the 3 ANCHORS traveling with him.
He got great press!
The only negative was that the IDIOT would not admit that the Surge worked!
Even the hyped, super-ego driven, empty, meaningless speech in Germany was hyped to the positive.
Are you really that stupid…’Negative coverage’!?
Comment by tiger woods | August 7, 2008
All news outlets constantly playing Mccains negative ads against Obama and you still deny the TRUTH Tiger. Despite all that McCain is still behind in the polls. Tiger: you have a monumental capacity for seeing only what you want to see. The scientific name for your disease is dislexic stupidity. That’s why I remain cordial to you. As a good Democrat I feel sympathy towards the sick. Get well soon…
Comment by the oracle | August 7, 2008
I still haven’t seen any negative ads. If a McCain ad is negative just because it’s pointing out a problem with Barry, then all ads are negative that mention the opponent.
Comment by Tspud1 | August 8, 2008
Come on Oracle, are you saying that,
Obama is more a celebrity than a politican, or
Dealing with his lack of experience, or
Dealing with his ever-changing mind…
If you are saying that these are ‘negative’, then, YES, you are right. I certainly hope that TRUTH, even if negative, is acceptable to you.
Comment by tiger woods | August 8, 2008
Tiger(Kitty) If the names were transposed on the Hilton ad from Obama to McCain you would be screaming from here to hell and back that Obama was practicing negative campaigning. Everything I say about you being nothing but a propaganda repeater for the right is true and you yourself prove it each time you post.
Comment by the oracle | August 8, 2008