[halyshitzob]

Traveler
The MLM? I do think that McCain's popularity is gonna stay at least as constantly high as it currently is, if not increase. I think the independants will continue to love him and the more his popularity increases with the independants the more it'll fall with the GOP however his overal popularity will remain. MLM = Mainstream Liberal Media
McCain's popularity is a creation of the media, and his fall from grace can be just as easily facilitated by them. If he becomes the Republican nominee it is an inevitability, the only question is will they turn on him BEFORE that as he increasingly sides with and sucks up to the nominating electorate of the GOP.

[Ferkilort]

MLM = Mainstream Liberal Media

What's that?

You mean the US mainstream media that has favoured Bush every step of the way? The same mainstream US media that has acted as a cheerleader for the Bush Administration? The same mainstream US media that can't be bothered to report on the most horrific failures of the Bush Administration? The same US mainstream media that lead the charge to impeach Clinton over a stained dress?

And the same mainstream US media that is so desperately trying to get a major policy change in the mass-media-ownership laws through Congress? They've failed twice now, but they are still working hard to put the right poeple into Congress to make sure that next time that bill comes up, it will be passed. As a general rule, that means supporting the Republicans over the Democrats and that is exactly what the mainstream US media has been doing now for about the last 10 years straight.

Doesn't look very liberal to me.

[hernkingAnank]

Mad_Michael
You mean the US mainstream media that has favoured Bush every step of the way? The same mainstream US media that has acted as a cheerleader for the Bush Administration? The same mainstream US media that can't be bothered to report on the most horrific failures of the Bush Administration? The same US mainstream media that lead the charge to impeach Clinton over a stained dress? No, I am referring to the Mainstream LIBERAL Media that happily showed pictures of "torture" in U.S. terrorist prisons for months on end, but will not show video of terrorists sawing the heads off of innocent people or even cartoons considered offensive by terrorists.

The MLM which elevates John McCain to a modern folk-hero ONLY when he is bashing his own party, but marginalizes someone like Zell Miller who has the termerity to criticize democrats.

The MLM that goes on and on about the failures of the Bush administration in Katrina, but whitewashing the absolute failure of the local and state leaders who happen to be democrats

The MLM that demands answers of Dick Cheney's hunting accident, the victim of which walked out of the hospital looking like a million bucks less then a week later, but treat Teddy Kennedy as the great "Liberal Lion" and to this day do not demand that the Chappaquidick Inquest findings be made public.

The MLM which drove Trent Lott out of the Majority Leadership for some innocuous comments on a hundred some-odd year old's birthday, but utterly nary a peep when a great statesman and former majority leader of the Democratic party--former Klansman Bobby Byrd--uses the word nigger.

The MLM which refuses to abandon Bush-bashing forged documents saying that althought the documents may be fake, what they say is true. Whereas genuine war heroes like the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are attacked and simple questions as to why John Kerry's honorable discharge was dated during the Carter Administration (when many formerly LESS-THAN-HONORABLE discharges were revised to honorable) years after he left the military. John Kerry has not authorized the release of all of his military service records TO THIS DAY while Bush has had his released since 2000.

[amehoubFomo]

No, I am referring to the Mainstream LIBERAL Media that happily showed pictures of "torture" in U.S. terrorist prisons for months on end, but will not show video of terrorists sawing the heads off of innocent people or even cartoons considered offensive by terrorists.

The MLM which elevates John McCain to a modern folk-hero ONLY when he is bashing his own party, but marginalizes someone like Zell Miller who has the termerity to criticize democrats.

The MLM that goes on and on about the failures of the Bush administration in Katrina, but whitewashing the absolute failure of the local and state leaders who happen to be democrats

The MLM that demands answers of Dick Cheney's hunting accident, the victim of which walked out of the hospital looking like a million bucks less then a week later, but treat Teddy Kennedy as the great "Liberal Lion" and to this day do not demand that the Chappaquidick Inquest findings be made public.

The MLM which drove Trent Lott out of the Majority Leadership for some innocuous comments on a hundred some-odd year old's birthday, but utterly nary a peep when a great statesman and former majority leader of the Democratic party--former Klansman Bobby Byrd--uses the word nigger.

The MLM which refuses to abandon Bush-bashing forged documents saying that althought the documents may be fake, what they say is true. Whereas genuine war heroes like the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are attacked and simple questions as to why John Kerry's honorable discharge was dated during the Carter Administration (when many formerly LESS-THAN-HONORABLE discharges were revised to honorable) years after he left the military. John Kerry has not authorized the release of all of his military service records TO THIS DAY while Bush has had his released since 2000.

Perhaps you should tell us exactly which outlets are doing this and when. The media you describe certainly aren't the same outles I watch day in and day out. Rather than paint with a broad stroke and generalize, something you hate when it is applied to you, perhaps you would deign to give us examples so we can view the stories ourselves. If you don't than that pretty much tells the story.

[casinobonusnolimit]

adaher
Obama is popular because of the convention speech and the mature way he's conducted himself since being elected to the Senate. He's gotten fantastic reviews from his colleagues, with the notable exception of the McCain incident. That was a misunderstanding more than any actual friction between the men.

The man clearly has a brain, leadership qualities, and is an outstanding communicator. Plus he's young and energetic. I think the minority aspect is rather far down the list of his qualities, as it is with all successful politicians. If you're known as a woman, or an African-American first, you're appeal probably doesn't extend very far. Obama transcends race. What a joke, if Barack Obama was John Smith, and white and every word he had ever uttered were exactly the same, he would be getting little to no national attention. Far from transcending race, he represents nothing more than the democratic party's complete and utter fixation with race.

And the "McCain incident" was not a misunderstanding. McCain's letter was dead on, Obama--despite his lip service to wanting to treat the issue at hand in a bipartisan and in your word "mature" manner, he jumped on board a completely partisan band wagon.

On the otherhand, even though McCain was EXACTLY right, the letter was also a demonstration of what a political whore McCain is. What was unusual about the letter was NOT its tone, but that it was directed at a democrat. McCain generally had reserved such lambasting for his OWN party in order to bask in the attention and adoration of a MLM that just loves to elevate Republicans bashing their own, but now that he desperately wants the nomination, the letter was nothing more than a crass attempt at throwing red meat to the party base.

[AndyPharmc]

Oddly enough, the one name I can't understand is Rudy - his record as Mayor NYC isn't all that pretty if you actually look at the facts rather than an emotional impression of 9/11. I certainly don't like him at all and I'm normally a fan of the 'moderates' (like Clinton, McCain, etc).


How can you say that? New York practically had a renaissance under Giuliani. Something like a third of the drop in crime in the 90s is accounted for by New York alone.

What a joke, if Barack Obama was John Smith, and white and every word he had ever uttered were exactly the same, he would be getting little to no national attention. Far from transcending race, he represents nothing more than the democratic party's complete and utter fixation with race.


Well, being black has gotten him more favorable attention than he would have gotten if he was white, but he's justified it with his performance since then.

Obviously, if he had been white, he wouldn't have gotten that speaking slot at the convention. He was just a State Senator running for the Senate. But he took the ball and ran with it.

[TeapseTic]

It's the "in" thing to like minorities in politics. Plus he's good looking. As someone else said, he hasn't had a chance to screw up yet. He is well spoken. He's not viewed as an extremist.

He hasn't been productive. All he's been involved in is that dumb posture battle with McCain. Other than that, he's been below the radar because he really hasn't done much. He was supposed to come out a strong leader, but he hasn't shown that. He was much liked to be a part of leadership for the next generation of democrats. Part of his problem, as well with all other democrats is that they are too weak to capitalize on Bush's failures. Obama can't capitalize on big issues. Most Americans saw him wimper like a puppy when McCain tested him. It's all show except the West Wing has better actors.

[Ygd2qr8k]

He's a Senator. What he "does" is vote on legislation, write up legislation, question Bush nominees, and speak on the issues. He's done all those well.

For my money I'd rather see him run for governor of Illinois if he wants to be President, as Senator isn't really the best training ground for future Presidents.

[FinanseMikky]

He's a Senator. What he "does" is vote on legislation, write up legislation, question Bush nominees, and speak on the issues. He's done all those well.

For my money I'd rather see him run for governor of Illinois if he wants to be President, as Senator isn't really the best training ground for future Presidents.

Who would he run against? Who would those prospects be, because I don't see him waltzing in there taking governorship. He does seem to be neutral, rather plastic if you ask me, there's no big achievements he can arm himself with on an election campaign.

"Vote Obama! He's sterile, he's safe, and he's no threat to anyone!"

I like his ideas, he's a smart guy. He's just not good for the Democrat Party right now. Right now the democrats have been lame. They've been sitting on their cans not doing much. They haven't really challenged much. The biggest challenge Bush has ever faced was the Dubai incident and that confrontation was headed by Republican leaders, not democrats. The only one to challenge the Patriot Act was a Republican Rep.

Reid and Pelospi are great people when it comes to going on the mike and talking big game, but in the end they have very little bark and they go with the flow in the end.

Democrats needs strong leadership. They need to reshape the Democrat vision statement and work more assertively.

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Wes...w-10-24-05.mp3

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/fox...ng_051228a.wmv

http://www.securingamerica.com/

Clark says the things that progressives like. He's got great military smarts. I think the Democrats could really be strong with him weaved into the party. He's been someone that has been productive. His military history is appealing and he's articulate with his ideas. I just wish that Democrats would hand him the 'conch', sorta speak, and let him carry the Demos. Why the demos don't look to him for leadership is a bit odd to me. He seems like the ideal person that the Democrats need to give them political bite.

[discountviagraman]

Wes Clark has no political smarts, no policy smarts, and little in the way of integrity.

If the Democrats really want a general, they should try to get Hugh Shelton to run. Shelton supported Edwards in 2004, so we know he's politically compatible with the Democrats. And unlike Clark, he didn't suddenly convert to the Democratic Party because they had an opening for a candidate and the GOP didn't.

[textarchive]

Wes Clark has no political smarts, no policy smarts, and little in the way of integrity.

If the Democrats really want a general, they should try to get Hugh Shelton to run. Shelton supported Edwards in 2004, so we know he's politically compatible with the Democrats. And unlike Clark, he didn't suddenly convert to the Democratic Party because they had an opening for a candidate and the GOP didn't.

Well at the onset, Clark didn't agree with many Republican views. If you listen to what he's said lately, he seems a bit disenchanted with the Republicans. As a matter of fact, I still think Clark is a Republican at heart, the only thing is that Bush has taken the party to such unfamiliar dynamics that most can't even recognize the party as being Republican except by name.

Hugh Shelton seems to play the part of Clark's foil in this political play. I don't really have much to look at to recognize him as a strong political leader.

[rujeltaoser]

I don't see how Clark is any more qualified than Shelton is. The only difference between the two is that Shelton hasn't tried to run for President. Running for President doesn't really make you a man of substance.

To me, references are important, and most of Clark's peers have said they would not support him. Many of them don't have a political ax to grind, like Shelton, a fellow Democrat. I don't think Clark has what it takes and nothing he's said since 2004 has given me any indication that he has the slightest clue how to be President. There are many better Democrats to choose from.

[Trercakaressy]

adaher
Well, being black has gotten him more favorable attention than he would have gotten if he was white, but he's justified it with his performance since then. How has he justified it? What performance? Other than being black, what has he done to distinguish himself and stand out that warrants the attention the media gives him?

Now here is the million dollar question, how will the media coverage of Jim Steele compare to Barack Obama's?

[leijggeds]

Well she's certainly a polarising figure but not in a way of policy, she's hated for her policy and for the person she is where as someone like say the President is generally disliked for his policy but is a very likeable person like her husband was. So how she made it in above Bush is beyond me! As a person she's seen as a witch but left of centre democrats seem to like her, the out and out liberals hate her as do all of the conservatives so how she makes it onto that list is totally incomprehendable to me!

I still can't understand why anyone hates Hillary. Which policies is she hated for? What is the problem with the "person she is"? Why is she seen as a witch? Specifically, why do you hate her?

I think she is an amazingly smart woman. What's so bad about her?

[RaicickKida]

I still can't understand why anyone hates Hillary. Which policies is she hated for? What is the problem with the "person she is"? Why is she seen as a witch? Specifically, why do you hate her?

I think she is an amazingly smart woman. What's so bad about her?

Only the conservatives hate Hillary because of who she is, essentially a CLinton.

While I do not hate her, I will never vote for her. Two reasons really. First and foremost is that if she were in office she would push hard for socialized medicine ala the Canadian model. That and that alone is enough to make bme suspitious of her. However add to that the fact that most of us who have followed her stances know she is a liberal, and now she is trying to ingratiate herself with moderates to get their votes, and it is simply a politician I really really do not trust. Others I just really do not trust.