Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
pan....IMO, you have an obsession with Obama.
Take the Resko "scandal" in which Obama did nothing illegal....but that you bring up again and again.
|
Wright I bring up because it does bother me. Rezko, do a search... I really don't think I have brought him up hardly ever if ever. I may have maybe 3-4 posts with his name.
Quote:
So where is the Keating Five scandal? Charles Keating, a convicted racketeer ...and McCain friend behind the S&L scandal that cost the taxpayers billions. (How much did Resko cost the taxpayers?) McCain, while not charged with any crime (same as Obama) intervened with fedleral investigators on Keating's behalf, took hundred thousand in campaign contributions from Keating....McCain's wife and father had a sweetheart development deal with Keating on a shopping center in Phoenix.
|
So reverse it. I also did not account for Biden's son being hired as a lobbyist. Or some of Biden's percieved scandals.
McCain in the Keating 5 was cleared of impropriety but criticized for poor judgment. By all means turn it around and make it a scenario.
Quote:
IMO...selective outrage on your part based on your bias, not objectivity.
|
See, I'm biased because I am a Democrat. I know and read more about Dems that I do Republicans because I never thought I would vote for one, especially for president. I know Voinivich, like Voinivich because he is a hometown boy..... But I probably know more about Sherrod Brown because he is THE MAN. I know more about Strickland in his short period of time than I knew about Taft during his whole term.... except for the corruption and scandals in Taft's office.
I'm biased because I am appalled that the party I love and have supported can nominate such a man. 20 years ago the great Gary Hart lost everything because he challenged the press and they found him with Donna Rice. Right or wrong, that scandal cost him the nomination.
20 years ago Dukakis lost everything due to perceptions of 1 picture in a tank and Willie Horton.
28 years ago, Ted Kennedy was pulled because of perceptions over Chappaquidick.
16 - 8 years ago Clinton could not achieve anything because of perceived scandals and it tied up government because one party and some in his own wanted to destroy him.
Yet, here we are when there are far worse perceptions and the party vehemently defends all these scandals that come up on this man. And the only explanation I can come up with is because he is black. There are far better black men out there that could be leaders, why this one? It makes no sense to me.
This to me is selling out the party and values I have put into this party.
Quote:
The rest, IMO, is based on ignorance and intolerance.....some sort of "guilt by association" in order to support your outrage.
|
Then why post in this thread? If all you can do is point out what is wrong and the bias then why post? If you cannot reverse the situations and perceptions then why post?
Then when I look to the GOP nominee, I see an old man trying to fulfill his dream. However, I am not as emotionally tied to that party so I can look at who they put up, not knowing that much about the man and decide to support him..... because the party I loved, worked for and had supported since I was old enough to understand politics and issues has sold me out. They have sold out my ideals, my principles, my beliefs and my values to the country I LOVE to nominate someone who I just can't stomach.
So I turned it around, I wanted to see how GOPer's would support a man their party nominated that would have the same perceptions.
Funny thing is, I don't see the GOP ever nominating someone like that.