The love affair with the main stream media is over. Obama, finally got slammed dunked by journalist Charlie Gibson & George Stephanopolis during the debate in Pennsylvania. The left is outraged, stating that they were too hard on Obama. "it just wasn't fair"!

Yet, over recent months Americans have noticed a notable bias from liberal media outlets, especially coming from the MSN'S in FAVOR of Obama. Hillary was complaining, that the prior debates were unfair to her. SNL has continually made fun of the debates--showing a deliberate bias in favor of Obama.

Well, the "chickens have come home to roost." Obama didn't look too well last night. Constantly having to defend his elitist comments, his pastor disaster, & now something new. His association with an American terrorist.

After about 40 minutes of him having to answer to these questions, which in my opinion, he still hasn't. Especially regarding Rev. Wright, he stumbled on answers to policy.

This is where Charlie Gibson won his war. Obama talking about taxes, stating he would only raise taxes on anyone making over 250K per year. Charlie WMD-D Obama when Obama stated he was going to raise capital gains tax to 28% from the current 15%. When Charlie "informed" Obama that the government collects more taxes when capital gains tax is lowered. Then informed him that over 1 million working class Americans are invested in the stock market, Obama looked stunned.

When Charlie stated that raising capital gains tax is actually a tax increase to all Americans, Obama looked dumbfounded, & yet still tried to defend his position by stating.

"Warren Buffet" told me that he pays less percentage in taxes than his secretary does. Obama then states he is after the wealthy wall-streeters. Still failing to realise that if Warren Buffets poor secretary has any kind of investment, she will still be paying the same amount in capital gains tax as her boss, Warren Buffet.

Then Charlie got him again on raising the cap on Social security, calling it another tax increase.

Oh well, it went on. But, it is very easy to see that if Obama cannot read a speech from a telepromter, he is out in the cold. Obama lost this debate in a very big way.

Both on personal issues, & set policies he plans to inact.

I didn't see the debate but I've been listening to replays of Obama being grilled on the manufactured issues all day.

I actually though he handled himself fairly well.

He did a nice job with the Wright issue, knocked the silly ass lapel pin nonsense out of the park, and shoved the Bill Ayers stuff right down Clinton's throat (But didn't your husband pardon them? LMAO).

Not a bad day's work.

I didn't hear anything about the cap gains business, but that's easily surmountable. He simply has his economics people pull and all nighter revising the policy to be more bottom-two-income-brackets friendly and then waits for it to be brought up again.

__________________
...Old Europe, a once-dominant region now reduced to sucking at the geopolitical teat of America... they spent the better part of the last millennium conquering the world and taking the good stuff home with them... And what do they get for their troubles? Ungrateful colonies demanding their independence. And after you taught them how to play cricket!...

-Jon Stewart

I agee with your lapel pin. It's not neccessary to wear to show patriotism. However, he did still defend Rev. Wright regarding his patriotism, stating that he was an x-marine. A Pennyslvania democrate supporter stated, well Timothy McVey was also in the U.S. Army, who is responsible for the Oklahoma city bombing.

There is something going on here. Mostly to do with the personal character of Barack Obama. The dis-trust is starting to become apparent, even with-in his own support.

Last night after the debate, a Pennyslvania democrat audiance was assembled & was asked questions. The one question that was very revealing:

They were asked if their democrat favorite did not win the nomination, either (Hillary or Obama) would they consider voting for John McCain. 1/2 of that audiance raised their hands.

This goes to show that the democrat party is spliting right down the middle. Will they be able to unite behind an Obama candidate. If he doesn't kick his Pastor Wright under the bus, or there still remains questions about his other associations, Hillary supporters will be voting for John McCain.

I agree with you that Wright is really the only albatross around Obama's neck right now. (Or at least I think we agree on that.)

But I don't think he (Wright) has done as much damage to Obama as you do.

I think Obama is still in a position from which he can easily recover. Or at least he's in a position from which an experienced politician could recover. Obama has shown me on several occasions that he's still an amature. A very gifted amature, but an amature never the less. It's possible that he could let this drag him down, but I honestly don't think it's a big enough issue.

That said, I don't think Obama is going to win the nomination regardless.

I think Hillary is going to win PA by double digits, and I think she might even break a 20 pt. lead. The race is hers to win and she's not making any mistakes. (And it doesn't hurt her that Obama was the recipient of this debate's bashing). Obama is going to take 85% to 90% of the black vote and a smattering elsewhere around the state. Hillary is going to clean up on the lower-middle-class, beer drinkin' & gun totin' crowd - which essentially is the rest of the PA Democratic Party.

The election is proportional, as are the rest of the Dem. primaries (with the exception of Montana and SD, I believe, which are partially proportional) so she's got a decent chance of closing on Obama's lead a little bit going in to the Denver.

Now, she's not going come from behind and beat Obama in pledged delegates, that's pretty much a given and a mathamatical imposibility. It's doable, but the Earth is more likely to fall into the Sun in the next few weeks.

But what she can do, and what she's trying to do, is to tighten up the race to the point where the superdelegates can look at it as a "statistical tie".

If she goes in to Denver behind by 200 delegates or so you're looking at Obama ahead by one half of one percent of all pledged delegates.

I've already heard a number of superdelegates say that they would consider a number much higher than that a "statistical tie" and would feel comfortable voting for the candidate that they felt was best qualified to represent the Deomcratic Party and beat the Republican candidate in a general election.

Now whether more than the dozen or so superdelegates who I heard interviewed feel that way, and whether any of them would actually break with the electorate are different matters entirely.

My gut tells me that they would though. I could very well be wrong, and I'm sure many people would disagree with me. But I think they'll do it at least to the extent that Hillary is able to squeek by.

And from there the general election is Hillary's to lose, and again my gut tells me that that she doesn't.

I don't want Hillary to be the next president, but I think she's gonna be.

__________________
...Old Europe, a once-dominant region now reduced to sucking at the geopolitical teat of America... they spent the better part of the last millennium conquering the world and taking the good stuff home with them... And what do they get for their troubles? Ungrateful colonies demanding their independence. And after you taught them how to play cricket!...

-Jon Stewart

Ratings, criticism big for ABC presidential debate: Financial News - Yahoo! Finance


So you reap what you sow.

Without his planned speeches or his "bumper sticker" crowd pleasers, Obama looked like a deer in headlights.

Hillary handled herself like a seasoned politician which she is compared to Obama.

Face it, Obama sounded like Bush. Falling all over himself, mumbling and dancing around the questions if he even tried to answer them.

He was caught in a out right lie when he tried to say that he only knew Ayers from the Weather Underground terrorist group because they lived in the same neighborhood.


Obama once visited '60s radicals - Ben Smith - Politico.com

This doesnt prove Obama and Ayers are best friends, but it does prove Obama is lying about his connections to Ayers. If he will lie about that, what else is he hiding?

As soon as the democrat primary is over - Obama will change his tune regarding Wright...if he don't - he will lose a TON of votes.
In the general election this issue will come out much stronger - the Republican machine hasn't even warmed up yet.

What isn't he lying about.

Seems Obama has more secrets then Hillary.

This morning on the news Obama was shown at a rally saying "This is my response to the type of questions I got the other night".

He started brushing off the shoulders and front of his jacket like he was brushing off lint.


I have never seen a Presidential candidate with such outright distain for his critics in my life. Kind of explains why he refuses to wear a flag pin on his lapel. He has too much self-rightous indignation to show outward patriotism.


What a jack-ass.

__________________


"We can't screw it up any worse than they have." - Barack Obama

Wanna bet?



"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste...." - Rahm Emmanuel

I am writing it in bold capital letters to help you swallow the fact into your brain less painfully.

REALITY: OBAMA WAS EIGHT YEARS OLD WHEN THE WEATHERMEN WERE ACTIVE.

So people only have friends who are their age?

The fact is:

Barack Obama was born on September 4, 1961. He turned eight on September 4, 1969. The Days of Rage, in which William Ayers participated, occurred in October 1969.

If I made friends with Charles Manson, Adolf Hitler, and Atilla The Hun would it make any difference that I was a child or not even born when they committed their crimes?

It shows a lack of character to make friends with such people.

It also shows us who Obama feels comfortable with.

__________________


"We can't screw it up any worse than they have." - Barack Obama

Wanna bet?



"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste...." - Rahm Emmanuel

Which has nothing to do with anything.
I have friends that are decades older than me.
Nobody is saying that Obama had anything to do with Weather U whatsoever, the point is he is friends with one of the WU main founders, who is still a radical leftist.
The point is who does the man hang with...racist radical preachers and radical leftist...you can dispute that this has anything to do with how he would be President - but when he is born means nothing.

Because of his background I doubt Obama will be able to get a Top Secret Clearance because he is too much of a security risk just because of the friends he keeps. These are people that you don't want knowing national secrets. And he will tell them what he knows because he thinks his friends are more important then national security.

__________________


"We can't screw it up any worse than they have." - Barack Obama

Wanna bet?



"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste...." - Rahm Emmanuel

Obama's Ayers connection is thinner than that of McCain-The Bronfmans connection. Bronfmans are one of America's most criminal families.

I had started a thread about it and you were all tongueless. So this thread smells badly of racism. Blunt and arrogant racism.

Obama's Ayers connection is completely phonny and a stretch.

The Chicago Sun-Times wrote in an editorial,

"But Ayers, it is also true to say, has since followed in the footsteps of the great Chicago social worker Jane Addams, crusading for education and juvenile justice reform. His 1997 book, A Kind and Just Parent: The Children of Juvenile Court, has been praised for exposing how Cook County's juvenile justice system all but eliminates a child's chance for redemption. Is Barack Obama consorting with a radical? Hardly. Ayers is nothing more than an aging lefty with a foolish past who is doing good. And while, yes, Obama is friendly with Ayers, it appears to be only in the way of two community activists whose circles overlap. Obama's middle name is Hussein. That doesn't make him an Islamic terrorist. He stopped wearing a flag pin. That doesn't make him unpatriotic. And he's friendly with UIC Professor William Ayers. That doesn't make him a bomb thrower. Time to move on to Phony Flap 6,537,204." [Chicago Sun-Times, 3/3/08]

Washington Post:
Obama-Ayers Link "Is A Tenuous One." The Washington Post reported in a fact check, "But the Obama-Ayers link is a tenuous one. As Newsday pointed out, Clinton has her own, also tenuous, Weatherman connection. Her husband commuted the sentences of a couple of convicted Weather Underground members, Susan Rosenberg and Linda Sue Evans, shortly before leaving office in January 2001. Which is worse: pardoning a convicted terrorist or accepting a campaign contribution from a former Weatherman who was never convicted?" [Washington Post, 2/18/08]

Woods Fund President Harrington:
"This Whole Connection Is A Stretch." The Washington Post reported in a fact check, "Whatever his past, Ayers is now a respected member of the Chicago intelligentsia, and still a member of the Woods Fund Board. The president of the Woods Fund, Deborah Harrington, said he had been selected for the board because of his solid academic credentials and 'passion for social justice.' 'This whole connection is a stretch,' Harrington told me. 'Barack was very well known in Chicago, and a highly respected legislator. It would be difficult to find people round here who never volunteered or contributed money to one of his campaigns.'" [Washington Post, 2/18/08]

Noam Scheiber Of TNR:
"I Don't See Evidence Of Any Relationship" Between Obama And Ayers. Noam Scheiber of The New Republic wrote, "Ben says Ayers and Obama were, at best, casual friends. Even that seems to overstate things, though. I don't see evidence of any relationship. The only concrete connection we know of is the meeting, which was attended by a number of local liberals; their contemporaneous membership on the board of a local organization; and a $200-donation by Ayers to one of Obama's state senate campaigns. (Obama also once praised something Ayers had written about the juvenile justice system.) I'm not saying they couldn't have been casual friends; just that there isn't much evidence for that at this point." [The New Republic, 2/22/08]

Birdsell:
Obama Links To Ayers Were "Pretty Slender Ties." The New York Sun reported, "'Those are pretty slender ties to a controversial figure,' the dean of Baruch College's School of Public Affairs, David Birdsell, said of Mr. Obama's links to Mr. Ayers." [New York Sun, 2/19/08]

Next time, come up with better credentials.

How do you know what he thinks about his acquaintances? How could you say he will say the national secrets with people he knows? Are you plain dumb?

Has GWB told all the secrets to his friends that he made past fifty years?

Has Dick Cheney told all the secrets he knows to the friends he made past sixty years?

Now you are taking giant strides in your plain Obamaphobia. Pity for you.