NO WAY, NO HOW, NOBAMA!

I don’t believe in God, or messiahs, saviors — secular or non secular — and I’m voting for McCain/Palin. So much for your pathetic Republican stereotyping!

I suspect he “mentioned” the VP slot…
I suspect HRC told him to kiss her ass, she wasn’t going to prop him up

Yup. I totally think that. I suspect that Hillary, like a great chess player, thinks her game out ten or twenty moves ahead of everyone else. She’s too smart to tie herself to a loaded anchor, which BO would be, whether he wins or lose.

Now the only thing I wish is that sudden pressing business demanding her total attention to her constituents in NY crops us, and she simply has no time to campaign for BO much as she would looooove to….

This remark arrived after the hurricane of sexual bigotry that was unleashed on America the day of Mccain’s introduction of Governor Sarah Palin to America. I won’t recap the shameful journalism, the smears and the innuendo here as we are all painfully well aware of what happened.

But I would like to point out that even before Palin made history and changed the political landscape with her powerful convention speech, the conclusion that many tried to force on voters was that Palin was a bad mother.

Five days after Obama said families are off limits, Michelle Obama feels it necessary to tell us all that the Obama’s will not have anymore kids because the “presidential race is enough additional responsibility”.

The Obama campaign is telling us that Sarah Palin is unfit to run for VP because she has young children. The Obama campaign is afferming and endorsing the sexism that has polluted the MSM, the blogs and the rhetoric of the democratic primary.

This announcement tells America that the Obama campaign has nothing left to stand on, nothing left to offer the voters and that they are truly desperate.

More importantly, it also finally unmasks the true origins of the smears spread about Palin’s daughter, the disgusting lies about Palin’s newly born son and the appalling sexism Americans have had to endure over the last year as nothing more than Obama campaign talking points.

Now we just have to wait for Obama to say, “That is not the Michelle I knew”.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/04/michelle-obama-no-more-kids-for-barack-and-me/

a. hillary
b. mccain

america first!

The bots, including African Americans, have naively put all their hopes and dreams into the con man Obama. Naturally, they’re gonna have intense interests in his opponents.

Haha. Touche.

the post (mine own), which I’m replying to here, was actually intended as a reply to you.

1. During the democratic primaries, the GOP and “liberal” media pundits greedily chimed in to attack Hillary each and every time Obama practiced his divisive race-baiting, gender-baiting and character assassination. While sexism was without question rampant, there was no talk of it at all. Indeed, in the few belated times in which Hillary even brought it up, they immediately slammed her for playing the gender card. Meanwhile, there was a breathtaking amount of scurrilous talk about racism, all of it dubiously benefiting the race-baiter Obama and hurting Hillary in particular, and the once all-powerful Clinton brand in general.

2. There is now no talk of racism to benefit Obama, but an instantaneous avalanche of talk about sexism which benefits Sarah Palin, i.e. benefits McCain and the very anti-woman GOP. Palin has been gender-baited, but nowhere near what Hillary was put thru. There’s simply no consistency here.

3. The same applies for when Obama race-baited McCain with that “By the way, did I mention he’s black?” statement. Immediately, Obama was called on it, and he immediately backed down. Understand that the subtext of race always exists and works like this: Under normal circumstances, when a minority cries racism, rightly or wrongly, it naturally causes a racial polarization of the electorate which naturally benefits the white (majority) candidate, because people, racist or not, don’t like to be called racist. This is why Harold Ford Jr., who was clearly race-baited with an ad which played on the racist Jim Crow era stereotype that black men lusted after hopeless, hapless, and helpless white women, was too afraid to even acknowledge that the ad in question run against him was indeed racist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UZBZ4GR8Ug

Ford is a very smart guy who knows that playing the race card is political suicide, particularly in a state like Tennessee. Ford is also an honorable guy who doesn’t like to play the race card. It’s just not his style, even when he should have.

In the Hillary vs Obama case, as opposed to the McCain vs Obama case, the all-black-crime-all-the-time “liberal” media, immediately chimed in to help Obama ensuring that the racial subtext would kick in–BUT IN REVERSE, where Obama, the minority candidate, would benefit instead of Hillary, the white candidate with impeccable civil rights credentials–even though Obama’s accusations were downright dubious.

Repeat:

i. Normally, the racial subtext should adversely affect the minority accuser even when he is right.

ii. But for Bill and Hillary, the corporate media decided to override this phenomena and made certain that it worked in reverse, even though Obama was ruthlessly crying wolf the whole time, i.e. incessantly race-baiting.

iii. For McCain, they simply let this insidious racial subtext work as it normally does. That is, they didn’t have to do much on McCain’s behalf when Obama said “By the way, did I mention he’s black?” The “liberal media” simply let nature take is course, if you will, and Obama immediately backed down. Frankly, Obama got too cocky. He actually thought that the all-black-crime-all-the-time corporate media would support his divisive tactics as they did during the primaries. DUMBFUCK. The corporate media will only allow Democrats to race-bait each other, or for that matter, the GOP to race-bait Democrats. They will NOT allow a Democrat, much less a “black guy” race-bait the GOP.

It is true that many too democrats didn’t stand up for Hillary when it came to the sexism as they did in total delusion for the NONexistent racism against Obama. However, feminists were crying bloody murder the whole time. These feminist were NEVER given any significant air time. Instead, what we saw during the primaries was a who’s of African American journalists, political pundits, political bloggers, political operatives many of whom worked in the Clinton Admin, etc., and all but a few were constantly race-baiting the both Clintons. Sure, we saw a lot of “Bros Before Ho’s” feminists vis-a-vis Rachel Maddow and fellatio feminists like Maureen Dowd, who were all too often joining in and bashing Hillary the few and belated times she even bothered to cry foul w.r.t. the rampant and blatant sexism.

Make no mistake about it: This is all by design, and the corporate media planned it out well.

Hint: Did you notice that 1990′s PC term “African American” was used almost exclusively during the early half of the democratic primary process? And after the primaries in early June, the term “black” started to make a comeback withing the lexicon of the corporate media. It’s truly peculiar (indeed quite suspect) that in December of 2007, the term “black” was still being used exclusively, but by January of 2008, the term “African American” suddenly became the only word uttered out of the mouths of the corporate media punditocracy. It seemed to come out of nowhere. Prediction: From now until election day, the term “black” will retake its place and that 1990′s PC term will fade into oblivion.

————–
As for Rove… Just so you know, Rove is a key campaign strategist for McCain, if not the outright puppet master of what has been going on since January in both primaries of the Dems and the GOP. Yes, I do believe Rove is the mastermind, or is one of them, behind the duplicitous media coverage that hid Jeremiah Wright from our sights until Obama had the nomination clinched.

A recent Wall St. Journal article cited here on NoQuarter said Obama never would have won Iowa if the Wright story had surfaced back in January. No shit! Ya think? *sarcasm*

Rove is a regular columnist in the Wall St. Journal. But there was one in which he wrote around May, which I found and back in May mind you, to be quite prophetic of how the “liberal” media now treats Obama. It’s so strikingly prophetic that its downright suspect. I can’t find the link for it at the moment, but it essentially said Obama’s campaign is based on the the cult of personality rather than detailed policies. This, Rove continued, makes Obama particularly vulnerable to personal attacks.

Rove’s comments beg 2 questions:
1. Why isn’t the media vetting Obama?
2. Why is the media not only repeatedly letting Obama get away with his vacuous rhetoric, but indeed cheering it on?

It’s as if they are laying out the red carpet for Obama and the Dems (bots) only to cruelly yank it later on.

Anyway, here’s Wright on Hannity back in 2007:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNTGRL0OJWQ
—note that the vid was posted in March 2, 2007.

Rightwing talk radio had been screaming Wright’s name for months before Wright finally surfaced on the televised media–but only after Obama had clinched the nomination. Question: Why would Fox sit on Wright for over an entire year? Is Fox pro-Obama? Is Hannity pro Obama? The only plausible interpretation is: They all knew about Wright, Ayers, etc., and they simply sat on it.

If the Michelle “Whitey” tape or something like it exists and surfaces in October, i.e. an “October surprise”, then that’s the smoking gun.

McCain/Palin ’08
Now that’s real change and hope