Obama opens 10 point lead.Follow

I was writing my post while you guys posted that stuff. I honestly did try to find the picture the Red was talking about (would have helped if he'd linked it), to be sure it wasn't the same one.

Again. It doesn't matter. It was a PR trip. Why do this with an opposition leader, and not with some current member of the government? A mayor, or minister of health, or something that would have made sense in the context of the event? Nope. He choose Odinga.


It's that poor choice that's important here. Not what the backdrop was.

Of course it does. You're going, with a straight face, rail against the "mainstream media" while you link to a blog which trimmed down the photo to look like a campign stop?It's a PSA stop for saying "Get tested for AIDS!"Because he's influential to people?

I'll sleep fine tonight knowing someone who takes a trimmed photo as proof of campaigning said I "fail"

You're right. I want you to e-mail that photo to every media outlet right now. If it's not on the front page tomorrow, we'll know it's a conspiracy.

If the backdrop doesn't matter, why did your little blogger trim it out?

To fit the space in the article. How should I know?


Here's another blog page with the photo. This one didn't crop it.


It doesn't change the meaning of the story one bit. It's not about where he was, it's about who he was with.

So you admit that Obama's campaign is based on lying to the public and hoping that they don't notice. Isn't that exactly what I've been saying all along? That he's not the politician most voters think he is?


Hence, why I'm wondering why no one in the media has covered it. It's not like it isn't abundantly obvious that anyone with his voting record claiming to be a "uniter" is lying. The only way he's ever going to "end partisan bickering" is if he puts all the Republicans against the wall and shoots them. It's certainly not going to occur as a result of his own willingness to compromise.




I started with all of that Smash. I've been talking about how much his personal past and public record doesn't match his campaign platform for months now. The Odinga thing is just kinda icing on the cake...


Do you really think this wont be forced into the public eye at some point in the election? You guys keep tip toeing around the issue, but at the end of the day, supporting a far left radical socialist with ties to fundamentalist Islamic groups and followers who commit mass ethnic violence isn't good on a US presidents resume. There's just no way to sugarcoat that.

Edited, Apr 3rd 2008 6:09pm by gbaji

Clearly, that makes it all "ok"!

Lol... I don't think so.

Er?

Some quotes from me in this thread:

"No one in the media has called Obama on his claim that he's a unifier by looking at his voting record and noting that he's got the most liberal record in the senate?"

"He's in favor of complete bans on handguns. He's got a 100% rating from planned parenthood. Not exactly stances likely to "end partisanship", is it?"

"He sells himself as something he's not. The Wright thing is just another example of this. He says he's above race, yet he's attended a radial black liberation theology church for 20 years. Yet another fact from his life that contradicts the picture he paints to the public in his campaign."



And that's just in this thread Smash. We can look at similar quotes in other threads like this one

"We're told he's about unity and getting past the partisan divide. Yet, in his brief time in the Senate, he's managed to rack up the most Liberal voting record in that body."

"We're told that he's not a black politician cut from the same cloth as Jackson and Sharpton, so white people shouldn't worry about his racial politics. He's "above race". Then we find out he's attended this radical black liberation church for 20 years."

"So far, almost everything we've been told that Obama stands for appears to not match the actual actions he's taken himself in his life, both politically and non-politically."


And that's just in a couple threads on the front page. I've been talking about the discrepancy between Obama's campaign position and his actual actions, votes, and decisions pretty consistently for quite some time now. Kinda amazing that you don't seem to know this.

Wow, you sound like Stephen Colbert.

You are aware his shows a satire, yes?

And what exact bearing does that have on the factual veracity of what I said?


They say that truth is sometimes stranger then fiction. You're right. A story about a US presidential candidate getting this far in the election with this many things hidden in his past while an unsuspecting public continues to blindly support him does seem like the plotline from a bad Grisham novel.

Unfortunately, the absurdness of it all doesn't make it any less true. And the blind willingness of so many people like you to just dismiss my concerns is even more bizarre. It's like I've woken up in one of those future distopias where everyone simply believes what they're told and never looks around and sees that it's all a lie.

Keep taking the "happy pills" I guess...

Holy spit. That's exactly how I feel about W!

I've given up on you coming around, though. You firmly established your "head in the sand" stance years ago.

Um... The article linked to on that blog page:




And you're correct. He was followed around by the press while in Kenya. Where are the transcripts of the speeches he gave at these rallies? While I haven't spent huge amounts of time, they certainly don't show up on any sort of quick search, and it would be an easy way to check to see what he said or didn't say about Odinga.


The only thing I've been able to find is excerpts where he attacks the Kenyan government on the issue of corruption. Which certainly can't hurt when he's traveling around with an opposition candidate, now can it?

Edited, Apr 3rd 2008 7:49pm by gbaji

You mean the opinion column written by conservative Daniel Johnson?

I was asking for a cite. You know better than that.

Edit: Funny, Mr. Johnson seems blind to Obama contacting Kibaki as well
The Atlas Shrugs photo, by the way, is the same photo from the AIDS center cut down hide its setting.

Well, Mr. Johnson seems pretty confident that they happened. Either Mr. Johnson was physically at these events or else he must know people from the press who were. Why doesn't he give us some real evidence of these events rather than relying on a chopped up photo from some blog as his proof of these speeches and rallies and endorsements?

In "can't prove a negative" fashion, you or Johnson or your blog-writers can always keep saying "But he's not releasing the real speeches!" It's up to the people claiming this means something to offer up the concrete evidence that it occured.

Hey! Maybe the lack of that evidence has something to do with why this isn't the lead story on CNN!

Edited, Apr 3rd 2008 11:56pm by Jophiel