I'm going to be very straightforward here...
I'm speechless. I'm confused. I'm scared.
How can a nation that is superior on so many levels, be so irresponsible in the handling of its own democratic process?
I've seen town hall meetings before. I've seen them on the federal, state, and local levels.
That was NOT a town meeting.
Tom Brokaw, a headline journalist for a network (NBC) that is admittedly...admittedly...in the back pocket of Barack Obama, moderated nothing short of a stump speech. He single-handedly kept the race close. He single-handedly kept the current poll numbers in favor of Obama. Out of over 6 million...6 million!...submitted questions, Tom Brokaw chose questions that we have already had answered.
Where was the people's voice? The character questions? The issues of gun control, abortion, gay-marriage, presidential policy, associations, records, etc?
We now live in a country where the media selects who governs us. They select the issues that matter to us. They deliver us the news we want to hear.
Why I'm scared?
People actually, whole-heartedly, believe it to be true. People have actually bought into the idea that a junior senator, the most liberal and radical candidate to ever run for president (check his easily researchable records and policy positions), will lead us to the promised land.
I pray for America. I pray for clarity of mind and the truth. Neither of which has been given to us or allowed for.
What have we done to ourselves?
4 comments:
i know. its disturbing.
im pretty dumbfounded myself, ryan.
whats happening???
God is still in control my friends
Wow, that was a pretty intense post with a few rather interesting allegations. A few days before the debate a few lefties were calling for Brokaw to step down as moderator, now after the debate, the righties seem to think Brokaw showed extreme bias. Both allegations to me are absurd. Brokaw moderated a town hall meeting. There's not much you can do to screw it up and he did a satisfactory job.
"He single-handedly kept the race close."? What world are you living in? Do you really think John McCain is running away with this campaign and this debate kept Obama in the hunt? Obama has been pulling away for some time now and most election analysts show a big lead for him. Of course, you could take the McCain campaign's stance (and what seems to be yours too) and just blame the media, the moderators, the polls, and probably the voters pretty soon.
Don't blame the media, blame your candidate. Americans by and large didn't buy the "suspending my campaign" ploy. They don't favor his health plan, his tax plan, his energy plan, and they don't believe his economic plan will create real sustained economic growth and rally the markets. They've pretty much rejected his campaign "going negative". Now of course there's many that do follow him (as you do and another fan of your blog seems to) but that doesn't seem to be the majority.
The people's voice was pretty obvious in the debate. Worries of the financial crisis, the bailout, national security (Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan), and the rising cost of health care. These are the issues the voters (especially undecided voters) want to hear the candidates discuss at length, argue and defend. I don't think Brokaw did a good job of letting them really go back and forth and "debate" but those are the issues the people are most concerned about and want to hear the candidates talk about.
I'm sure there were questions submitted about Keating, Ayers, abortion, gay marriage, and electoral records. These were in the minority though and don't adequately reflect the priority issues of swing voters this late in the election. People aren't holding out b/c they're still debating whether they want to vote for a pro-life or pro-choice candidate. They're waiting to see which candidate will benefit them most economically and help out their families.
Most Saturdays I canvass for Obama in Mount Vernon or Fredericktown - two heavily Republican and very conservative areas in Ohio. The breakdown (based on my own rough estimates of talking to voters) seems to be 55 percent voting McCain, 25 Obama, and 20 undecided. The vast majority of voters I talk to respond that the major issues affecting their vote are the economy, the bailout, health care, and the Iraq war - in that order. I have had a few (probably no more than 10 in the hundreds of doors I've knocked on) tell me that abortion or gay marriage were high priority issues. Those individuals also told me they had already made up their mind to vote McCain.
Here's the thing. Voters know where McCain and Obama stand on gay marriage and abortion (gay marriage was addressed briefly during the VP debate). Undecideds simply aren't holding out because of those social issues. Those may be contributing factors but not priority ones. For many voters these are priority aspects, but they've already made up their mind.
Major news outlets have reported on Obama's associations with Wright and now Ayers. Wright has been addressed. Voters that don't support the relationship they had aren't voting for him. Those that don't care are still considering him. The Ayers connection is absurd. McCain's involvement with Charles Keating was much more than Obama's ever was with Ayers or Rezko. Here's the thing. These still aren't huge things for voters because they really don't significantly say anything about presidential policies other than McCain got himself into an ethical pickle back in the 80s and Obama bought land from a corrupt guy and worked on education reform with a guy associated with the Weathermen 40 years ago.
The Ayers relationship blows me away. If McCain is relying on this last ditch effort, the ship is sinking faster than I previously thought.
Your allegation that we Americans have been fed a steady diet of lies in a grand corrupt scheme to steal this election away from the heroes John McCain and Sarah Palin is very extreme and seems a bit like you're chasing conspiracy theories to rationalize things. Of course, you're the one who believes we never landed on the moon, aren't you?
Josh,
Sorry it has taken me so long to respond. I have been debating how I should respond to this comment. I wanted to put this as nicely as possible.
First, believing that the media favors the liberal left is not a “conspiracy theory” as you may believe. It is a cold, hard fact. Look up campaign donations from the major media outlets and the news headlines on the nightly news. Read a newspaper whose editor is financing the Obama campaign. Barack Obama hasn’t had to defend his inexperience or his worthless record because the media has given him a free pass. To deny this, is nothing less than a blind interpretation of the facts. Blame my candidate? Hilarious stuff.
I never said John McCain was running away with the race. According to polls, McCain has been a few percentage points behind ever since the Republican convention. Unfortunately, I do not live and die by the poll results as it seems you do. Polls are very inconsistent and extremely bias for both parties, depending on the pollster. If you remember correctly, this was the same scenario in 2004. John Kerry led most of the later months, only to lose to George W. Bush on Election Day. Our country, believe it or not, is a moderate to conservative society. People can say one thing, but when they are in the voting booth, that is a different story.
I love your commentary about people disagreeing with McCain’s policy issues. That tells me a great deal about your mindset regarding politics. However, according to the national media and your own “poll” results, it sounds like half the people in this country agree with McCain. That would make that argument irrelevant. If the media tends to be liberal, I’d hate to see what those numbers really look like.
Now, your take on the debate. I stand by my position regarding Tom Brokaw and the type of questioning. Throughout history, a town hall meeting was established to see a different side of the candidates. Unique questioning. Personality. Character. Leadership. I understand the questions regarding the economy, but the selection of questions was not satisfactory to say the least. It, like I said, was nothing short of a political stump speech. Maybe if Obama would have agreed to McCain’s original plan of debates, we would have seen a true town hall meeting. Unfortunately, people would ask the tough questions there. We wouldn’t want Obama to have to answer those now would we?
Charles Keating was worse than an association with a domestic terrorist? You liberals. The Democrats involved in the Keating case testified that McCain had nothing to do with the Keating Five Scandal. All four Democrats have admitted that McCain was used as a scapegoat to show the public that it wasn’t all Democrats in the wrong. He has been cleared of any wrongdoing for quite some time.
I’m going to say just a few things about Obama’s associations because this is important. Obviously, you have been listening, and believeing, those media outlets. Barack Obama has denied and lied about his relationship with Ayers. He wasn’t a neighbor on the block. Obama chose to start his political career in the man’s living room. But, worst of all, Obama funded this man’s radical educational philosophy in Chicago. Over the years, Obama has granted Ayers over 50 million dollars that has been spent on radicalizing Chicago’s youth. Obama has given 50 million dollars to a domestic terrorist that is now an educator who wishes he had done more damage to America. A man who took a photograph standing on the American flag. An unrepentant terrorist.
Tony Rezko will be in jail after the election. Just another guy that has been funneled money to raise slum lords in Chicago by Obama.
Jeremiah Wright. Black Liberation theology is far from Christianity. It’s very own mission statement is scary enough. It is a “religion” filled with hate, racism, and intolerance. Barack Obama listened to it for 20 years and plays the oblivious card.
Oblivious. That’s a good word to describe EVERYTHING Obama.
Post a Comment