A Simple Question for Obama Supporters

[kennetha]

Okay, Obama folks, be honest. If it had been Hillary Clinton who was ganged up on by the moderators on gaffe after gaffe, would you have been upset? I think the answer is obviously no. Few of you are principled enough for that. I think you're upset not at the form the debate took, but because your guy looked really, really unimpressive last night.

[Fresh_Start]

1. maybe they are mad at ABC wasting

10 million viewers time

[Mags]

bravo!!

[Cant trust em]

2. There was little room to look impressive

when someone is asking about flag pins, 40 year old radicalism, and how much a reverend loves America. Let's face it, the first 45 minutes of the "debate" last night were a joke.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

3. Yes.

[splat]

4. I heard no complaints when Russert and Williams ganged up on Hillary earlier

[kennetha]

5. Exactly

[TwilightGardener]

8. Russert and Williams questioned her patriotism? Her former PASTOR'S

patriotism? How deeply insulting! Did they ask about Bill pardoning those terrorists? No?

[Windy]

20. there is ABSOLUTELY NO COMPARISON!!! Please, be realisitic!

And yes, it HRC wouldn't gotten ambushed like that by the moderators and Barack, I would have been upset and I would have lost respect for Obama!

[bklyncowgirl]

27. Russert & Williams ganged up on Clinton about drivers licenses for Illegal aliens

Last time I heard this was a legitimate issue. Lapel pins, pastors, who's gonna be vice president, not to mention who's bitter about whatever are not going to do a damn thing for the American people.

[blm]

6. I liked what he had to say - I agree with him that the BS matters the media dwells on are

given far too much attention compared to the real issues that SHOULD be of import to the electorate.

But then - I also believed the media gave the swiftliars too much attention, too.

Did you?

[treestar]

7. Yes.

the complaints are the shallowness and tabloid-like questions. That's the point. The stupidity of the way the debate went.

When, and they will, they treat McSame with the same kid gloves and Obama like this, it'll be the same reaction.

[Lost-in-FL]

9. That's a very childish argument

Since you are talking about switching places for a moment, Do you really think is ok not to talk about the issues and just gang up on someone based on "gossip"?

[kennetha]

12. I think these are legitimate political issues

They go to Obama's character, judgment and integrity. He's been given a completely free pass. He's grown arrogant and mistake prone. He deserved to be pressed and pressed hard. So I think what happened to him was both perfectly legitimate and extremely revealing.

[Lost-in-FL]

21. Press him hard but gave * a free ride in 2004?

Please...

You want a tough candidate? What has "tough" given us in 7 years??

[Window]

29. Pure unadulterated bullshit.

:thumbsdown:

[blm]

36. What did you dislike about his answers? Did YOU really not want the issues that effect citizens

and their security to be the main topics of debate?

[hfojvt]

10. Nice that you already answered your question.

"few of (us) are principled enough". I guess if we had more principles then we'd be Hillary supporters. :eyes: And then we'd be laughing at the way the M$M went after the likely Democratic nominee on trivia and phony "character" issues. Go Democrats!!

[elizm]

11. I was completely impressed with Obama last night.

And if you think for one minute that this hurt him, you are living in a dream world. This is a people powered movement and we will not allow the media or the DLC to pick our candidate. Not. This. Time. So live with it.

[kennetha]

16. Right

a people powered cult that can't see that the emperor really has no clothes.

[elizm]

28. Pathetic. nt

[bigbrother05]

13. The frame of the debate

should have been about issues, that effect everday lives, yes I would have been outraged, because the gotcha politics, have got to stop, it does not help anyone. If the media believes that this is what the american public want, they will continue to do it.
If we let our voices be heard, hopefully it will stop.
You putting, obviously no, in your post, suggest to me that you don't want an honest answer.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bigbrother05]

31. If and I say if you base your decision

on who you support, by what this board says, then you are lacking thinking skills, and remember I said if.

[SeattleGirl]

32. "You all"????

Stop it with the damned broad brush crap, please.

I don't believe all Obama supporters are the same, any more than I believe all Clinton supporters are the same.

And I don't care if I don't have any bona fides with you. I don't have to prove anything to you.

[TexasLady]

14. I appreciate the honesty of 'ganged up on'

And she was as well, just not for as long. The winner last night was clearly McCain/Hannity.

[redqueen]

15. How utterly disingenuous and insulting of you!

You ought to be ashamed.

"Simple Question" my brown ass.

Honest answer: YES.

Bite me, fucko.

[AZBlue]

17. Well, I can tell you it bothered me when they hounded her last night about

her comments on Wright (that she would get up and leave the church, etc).

[gateley]

18. I would have answered honestly and sincerely --

and my answer may have surprised you --

if you hadn't thrown in the "few of you are principled enough for that".

Good luck getting honest answers to a question in which you insult the very people you're questioning. Good tactic! :eyes:

[cali]

19. sorry there

dear. For months last fall I was called a hillbot because I defended her, and pointed out bias against her- even though I didn't like her.

[EV_Ares]

22. No problem being honest. First of all glad to see you admit he was ganged up

on by those idiots. And yes, I have complained when the victim was Hillary and we all should. A debate should just be that "a debate on the most important issues facing you and I, not the bs of the candidates like last night. I do support Barack and I will continue to do so because I think he is the best candidate for the party to run against the repukes. However, the crap that occurred last night should not happen to either candidate and as far as that goes McCain either.

[blogslut]

23. She was ganged on too

Don't you get it? That debate was an attack on the Democratic party.

[C_U_L8R]

24. Not a very principled comment you got there

and a very presumptuous argument...
but yes.. it would be unfair if the debate moderators ganged up on ANYONE.
Hillary, Obama, McCain, ANY BODY.
And as long as the moderators are pursuing tabloid issues
they are ganging up on US !!!

What ever happened to the League of Women Voters?
Instead we get these candy colored clowns
who anoint themselves as journalists. Phooey.

[democrattotheend]

25. I did say after the last debate that I thought Russert was harder on Hillary

He played gotcha with both of them, but I thought he was tougher on Hillary and I said so. I don't think it was as lopsided as last night though.

I was a little disappointed with Obama's performance on some of the questions, but I also thought the moderators failed because they spent so much time on issues that were so inconsequential to voters, and very little time on issues that mattered. Even the so-called "issues" part of it for the most part rehashed the same questions they have been asked about in previous debates, or questions that were hardly the most important to Pennsylvania voters. Of all the economic concerns facing voters, is the capital gains tax really what's keeping them up at night? And affirmative action is a relevant issue, but there's no big public case about it right now like the Michigan case, and I have not heard much about it recently as being a top issue on voters' minds these days. I think the housing crisis is probably more important to PA voters than affirmative action right now, and I have to wonder, if it were down to Clinton and Edwards instead of Clinton and Obama, would that question have been included? Somehow I doubt it.

They spent 45 minutes on Reverend Wright (in case we haven't heard enough about him already), flag pins, 60's radicals, and snipers in Bosnia, but not a single question on the environment, the housing crisis, suicide bombings in Iraq, gas prices (I don't think), FISA, torture, or many other issues that would have been more valuable to voters than hearing about Reverend Wright yet again.

[frogcycle]

30. i think the answer is obviously you don't know shit from shinola

and I am not an Obama supporter

try just fucking supporting a candidate instead of trying to start bar fights.
asshole

[zulchzulu]

33. It depends what the questions would have been...

I actually thought Obama looked good because he took the high road. He could have blasted Hillary on her Snipergate problem, but he didn't go there.

What was disgusting was that Hillary went right along with the moderators.

If they had ganged up on her like both she and the moderators had done and Obama participated in the bloodfest, it would be embarrassing. But she has much more that would absolutely skewer her if she was the nominee.

She won't be the nominee and Obama would be consistent and not participate in a bloodbath if a debate like the Philly Fiasco had happened.

[Butch350]

34. In all Honesty....

No! I realize that Obama and Hillary are fighting to run for the highest government office.

But actually O'bama got sand bagged. I thought the candidates were there to debate not debase!

One thing for sure, if the debate had started out about the economy, the things that people
in the real world care about - then O'Bama would have truly wasted HIllary.

NO BRAG! JUST FACT!

[Butch350]

35. I wouldn't be surprised

If Poppanoppolis didn't give Hillary a list of the questions that were asked.



(really just kidding);)

[guyanakoolaid]

37. Obama weathered your attacks nicely. Unimpressive was Clinton's plan for Social Seciurity

While attacking Obama's real-life solution, all she could come up with was that she would "form a committee to look into it". The most pathetic response of the entire debate.

And I noticed she was a bit toungue-tied explaining the Clinton administration's pardon of two Weather underground members while her smear machine ranted about Ayers. Did you not notice the uncomfortable stillness when Obama deftly killed that subject dead in the water with his "I was 8" remark and his line about Clinton pardons?

You think Clinton won because most of the cheap shots were done in her favor, but name one that Obama didn't more than adequately rebuff.

Clinton's right-wing tactics aren't fooling anybody, btw.

[EFerrari]

38. I've defended Hillary every time I saw her being abused by

the RW Noise Machine @ssholes, and, I will continue to do that.

[Raffi Ella]

39. TRUTH.

and their "outrage" is LAUGHABLE after the way they've acted here against Senator Clinton.

Atleast Barack had the chance to defend himself last night! Atleast it was done to his face and he was given the opportunity to RESPOND to the attacks.

Not so for Senator Clinton; She was attacked by KeithO in a Special Comment using smears as his justification for doing so - it was WIDELY Cheered and appreciated here. NOBODY thougt THAT was wrong.

NO Barack Supporter EVER thinks it's wrong when it's against Senator Clinton.

She is attacked daily by the msm and Barack supporter's sing along happily with the vicious lies and attacks.

So yeah, forgive me if I have little sympathy for Barack or any of his supporter's today.

[kid a]

40. you see what you want to see - you saw unimpressive - that shows your bias

I saw an amazing, humble man letting shit fly off him and keeping above the fray.
Even when Hillary stooped into the muck..Obama was WAY above it.

So - your bias is noted.