Gardening: we need weed killer.
The Democrats and their media sycophants have achieved a new low: it is now clear that no fewer than 7 of the YouTube debate questions were "plants" by staffers of Democrat candidates or democrat-controlled organizations (like unions, etc.). CNN, the gatekeeper and host of this farce claim that they knew nothing about this, but of the thousands of questions posed by genuine Republicans interested in the opinions of their candidates, so that they can vote in their Republican, primaries, they picked 7 of some 20-odd questions from people who have publicly declared themselves to be Democrats.
The Democrats have no business in trying to alter the outcome of an internal affair within the Republican party. You can bet your bottom that if the Republicans had done the same to the Democrat YouTube debates, we'd have heard loud screaming and tantrums from the aggrieved candidates ... the press baying for blood. But because it is the Republicans who have been sabotaged, we hear ... next to nothing. Media bias? If you need proof, here it is. And the Clinton News Network ("CNN") is the most guilty of all. This CANNOT be mere co-incidence. If the CNN staffers only looked for questions that would serve to try and further left-leaning viewpoints, then it might be reasonable to have picked those questions -- but that is media bias in its initial and obvious form, and cannot be excused.
There is also the question of journalistic negligence: the talk show loonies on the right only had to Google the names of the questioners to find out their true allegiance. One such "plant" was actually a Hil-liar staffer for some sort of Gay, Lesbian and Transgender task force. Others work directly for the Edwards campaign. Ever though of checking your sources, CNN? Remember Dan Rather? Sloppy work ... very, very sloppy. I'd have expected better from the internet and media-savvy left, but it might also go to show how blinkered and obsessively focused the left is on trying to do anything to win the next election. It is about electing a party to them, and the actual viewpoints and beliefs of the candidates, left or right wing, don't seem to matter: elect a Democrat and we will be alright ... everything will come out fine.
What was missing from the questions in the debate ... hmmm, lemme see .... How about Iraq? How about the economy? How about foreign policy? How about China or Russia? How about the dollar, the debt crisis, crime or health care? HOW ABOUT ANYTHING THAT ACTUALLY MATTERS TO OUR FUTURE?
Instead, we get to hear how Rudy believes in the Bible. How Mitt believes the "Word of the Lord." How Huckabee believes every word. What were they shooting for, CNN ... were they looking to portray the Republican candidates as religious zealots and too crazy to be considered as potential presidents? Remember, these guys are on the right -- their constituency is comprised of ... religious zealots, bible thumpers and creationists. All CNN managed to prove -- for the people that matter, the people voting as registered Republicans in the primaries -- is that the candidates have differing levels/types of Christian belief. It really does not matter what sort of Blue State Hairies are up in arms about those beliefs ... THEY DON'T VOTE IN THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARIES. Duh........ Talk about losing sight of the ball in their leftist zeal to discredit those of faith.
If anything, all CNN really managed to do was bolster the credibility of Rudy and Mitt, and there is no way that this was CNN's intention.
It also amuses me hugely to watch Hil-liar trot out Barbra to counter Hussein Obama's Oprah. Talk about a campaign that is completely out of touch with the American people. It is evidence of some Hollyweird-DC political connection between two groups of people that haven't associated with a real person on the street or on a factory assembly line in a long, long time ... if ever. Obama is the real deal. I stated that in my blog almost a year ago. He "gets" it. He really does represent how a great many Americans feel -- even if I disagree with a lot of it. His getting Oprah's support is HUGE, because Oprah is the single greatest arbiter of American thought to a massive segment of our population. She has cred with all walks of life, and she controls the woman's vote more than any other person in America. Barbra ... is popular with New Yorkers (the only place Hil-liar could carpetbag to get to the Senate), old farts in L.A. and leftists remembering the good old days of the '60s. She is irrelevant. And I am still waiting for her to make good her promise to leave.
This little contrast is far more important than it appears on its face: it is a distinction between a vote for the old and the new, a vote for the grand liberal baby-boomer posturings of the '60s and where the left might go tomorrow. If Obama doesn't know something, he says so and promises to study it and get back to the questioner. Hil-liar spouts party dogma -- old party dogma. Obama is not afraid to be wrong -- Hil-liar is terrified of being wrong and loses the plot completely whenever she gets off-message. And experience? Give me Obama.
The Democrats have no business in trying to alter the outcome of an internal affair within the Republican party. You can bet your bottom that if the Republicans had done the same to the Democrat YouTube debates, we'd have heard loud screaming and tantrums from the aggrieved candidates ... the press baying for blood. But because it is the Republicans who have been sabotaged, we hear ... next to nothing. Media bias? If you need proof, here it is. And the Clinton News Network ("CNN") is the most guilty of all. This CANNOT be mere co-incidence. If the CNN staffers only looked for questions that would serve to try and further left-leaning viewpoints, then it might be reasonable to have picked those questions -- but that is media bias in its initial and obvious form, and cannot be excused.
There is also the question of journalistic negligence: the talk show loonies on the right only had to Google the names of the questioners to find out their true allegiance. One such "plant" was actually a Hil-liar staffer for some sort of Gay, Lesbian and Transgender task force. Others work directly for the Edwards campaign. Ever though of checking your sources, CNN? Remember Dan Rather? Sloppy work ... very, very sloppy. I'd have expected better from the internet and media-savvy left, but it might also go to show how blinkered and obsessively focused the left is on trying to do anything to win the next election. It is about electing a party to them, and the actual viewpoints and beliefs of the candidates, left or right wing, don't seem to matter: elect a Democrat and we will be alright ... everything will come out fine.
What was missing from the questions in the debate ... hmmm, lemme see .... How about Iraq? How about the economy? How about foreign policy? How about China or Russia? How about the dollar, the debt crisis, crime or health care? HOW ABOUT ANYTHING THAT ACTUALLY MATTERS TO OUR FUTURE?
Instead, we get to hear how Rudy believes in the Bible. How Mitt believes the "Word of the Lord." How Huckabee believes every word. What were they shooting for, CNN ... were they looking to portray the Republican candidates as religious zealots and too crazy to be considered as potential presidents? Remember, these guys are on the right -- their constituency is comprised of ... religious zealots, bible thumpers and creationists. All CNN managed to prove -- for the people that matter, the people voting as registered Republicans in the primaries -- is that the candidates have differing levels/types of Christian belief. It really does not matter what sort of Blue State Hairies are up in arms about those beliefs ... THEY DON'T VOTE IN THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARIES. Duh........ Talk about losing sight of the ball in their leftist zeal to discredit those of faith.
If anything, all CNN really managed to do was bolster the credibility of Rudy and Mitt, and there is no way that this was CNN's intention.
It also amuses me hugely to watch Hil-liar trot out Barbra to counter Hussein Obama's Oprah. Talk about a campaign that is completely out of touch with the American people. It is evidence of some Hollyweird-DC political connection between two groups of people that haven't associated with a real person on the street or on a factory assembly line in a long, long time ... if ever. Obama is the real deal. I stated that in my blog almost a year ago. He "gets" it. He really does represent how a great many Americans feel -- even if I disagree with a lot of it. His getting Oprah's support is HUGE, because Oprah is the single greatest arbiter of American thought to a massive segment of our population. She has cred with all walks of life, and she controls the woman's vote more than any other person in America. Barbra ... is popular with New Yorkers (the only place Hil-liar could carpetbag to get to the Senate), old farts in L.A. and leftists remembering the good old days of the '60s. She is irrelevant. And I am still waiting for her to make good her promise to leave.
This little contrast is far more important than it appears on its face: it is a distinction between a vote for the old and the new, a vote for the grand liberal baby-boomer posturings of the '60s and where the left might go tomorrow. If Obama doesn't know something, he says so and promises to study it and get back to the questioner. Hil-liar spouts party dogma -- old party dogma. Obama is not afraid to be wrong -- Hil-liar is terrified of being wrong and loses the plot completely whenever she gets off-message. And experience? Give me Obama.
posted by Zaphod at Friday, November 30, 2007
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home