- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 10, 2008 at 7:20 pm #586729
JoBParticipantsince there is a lack of real information on this forum about the candidates.. i decided to go looking for insightful articles about the candidates.. from their own supporters…
since our national press is not going to willingly give us anything more than soundbites.. it’s time we got to know our candidates.
So, i will start with something for obama.. written by an Obama supporter after he made his speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004.
http://osdir.com/ml/ballistichelmet.heads/2004-08/msg00007.html
I actually found this on my way to try to find his actual Illinois senate record…
April 10, 2008 at 7:32 pm #621847
JoBParticipantthe vanity fair article on Obama.. more interesting info from an article that is actually cited by pro-Obama blogs..
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/03/obama200803
April 10, 2008 at 8:02 pm #621848
JoBParticipantlet’s not overlook wikipedia…
for those who are really curious, i found some interesting discussions on the second tab… about how and why info is included in wikipedia.. and how people feel about that.
April 10, 2008 at 8:04 pm #621849
JoBParticipantwikipedia on Hillary..
and since i find her interesting, i am going to go read this myself…
April 10, 2008 at 8:28 pm #621850
AnonymousInactiveApril 10, 2008 at 8:36 pm #621851
AnonymousInactiveMissed you NR :)
April 10, 2008 at 8:49 pm #621852
AnonymousInactiveThanks, JT! Good to be home!
I just want to follow up that previous link with a suggestion that you all read about McCain. I know that most will skip right over it, because you’re not Republican. However, I read things about McCain that I did not already know and that impressed me greatly. It’s extremely interesting to read about his life and how he served his country. I know the general thought is that us Reps are not excited about our candidate, but I am finding that I am excited more and more.
Plus, I read the links to Obama and Clinton.
April 10, 2008 at 9:28 pm #621853
JoBParticipantnew resident…
he is next on my reading list…
the reason i put the wikipedia links to both candidates up is that they make a real effort to print only the facts as they find them and to reference sources to those facts.
Since the candidates are living, they are respectful of their reputations and will only post negative information that has been legally proven… or in the case of one of the comments concerning one of Kenneth Starr’s many investigations of her as first lady… the conclusions of the report that caps the investigation.
that makes them a source that applies an equal standard to all contributions…
i appreciate that.
April 10, 2008 at 9:43 pm #621854
AnonymousInactiveI’m with you JoB. I appreciate just the facts.
April 11, 2008 at 1:42 am #621855
JoBParticipantthis isn’t just the facts..
but it is a debate that aired on Democracy Now by two black commentators about Barak Obama’s candidacy..
i haven’t seen this debate.. and won’t have time to do so till later tonight, but I am looking forward to it.
The debates on Democracy Now are generally of a fairly high caliber.
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/9/barack_obama_and_the_african_american
April 11, 2008 at 2:51 am #621856
JanSParticipantoh, my…you said “kenneth starr”….now there was one revengeful, vindictive dude…and there are people who believed him…amazing…
April 11, 2008 at 3:19 am #621857
JoBParticipantJanS..
there is a comment in Wikipedia which basically says that in one of the many Kenneth Starr investigations.. it was found that Hillary was not truthful in one of her statements… but again there was not enough of evidence of wrongdoing to prosecute her..
all of those investigations and the best they could do is to document an untruthful statement.
wikipedia bends over backward to give you all of the information… without becoming prejudiced.
And yep.. shades of Kenneth Starr.. easily acknowledged to be one of our century’s big time witch hunters…. by the same people who say the right wing conspiracy is a fabrication.
go figure.
there are a couple of interesting nuggets buried in the phrasing of some comments on Obama too.
as there are in the McCain entry…
April 11, 2008 at 3:44 am #621858
JoBParticipanthere is a good example about how a biased point of view can warp a story…
as best i can tell, this article from a conservative Magazine doesn’t tell a single lie.. it just makes exceedingly biased and pandering assumptions throughout.. which creates exceedingly biased conclusions.
this is the “intellectual” face of what will be one of the Republican strategies… they didn’t really need Reverend Wright’s videos…
April 11, 2008 at 4:25 am #621859
JoBParticipanti just spent some time wading through over two pages of “Hillary lies” links looking for a comparable article from a conservative magazine for Hillary.
I am giving up for tonight. It didn’t exist in over 20 links and related articles.
i found the source for many of the “clinton lies” remarks made here.. but none of them passed the test of not telling a single lie…
and it didn’t take much digging to find the source of those posts.. one even lists a nice user friendly list of pro Bush blogs in spite of identifying it’s contributers as liberals and independents.
Yes, i could find plenty of accusations… but an article with the “intellectual face” of the above… that i didn’t find.
It’s no wonder there is such a large anti-Hillary bias even among people who call themselves liberals. i found some of those same articles sourced on “liberal” sites… repeating unproven allegations and some “lies” that have already been debunked.
but there is no anti-Hillary bias in the media…
type the phrase “hillary lies” in google and see for yourself.
I honestly had no idea how pervasive or obvious it all was…
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.