It's obvious that to appear neutral, objective, fair, and unbiased, you have to devote equal space and time to both major American candidates. This is so elementary it is simply astonishing that it was not observed.

It's obvious that to appear neutral, objective, fair, and unbiased.

Richard....in our MSM? Hahahahahaha...you owe me one keyboard. Thanks for the chuckle.

There is no such thing as liberal bias in the Canadian MSM...blah, blah, blah, yada, yada, yada

Listen to the sound of my voice...you are imagining things...when I snap my fingers, you will realize that there is no liberal bias...SNAP!

Richard, study after study in the US by independent organizations show year after year that only one MSM source is "fair and balanced" in terms of coverage.

Take a wild guess who that might be.....FOX.

All the others, that's ALL the others, are heavily Communist, er, liberal slanted.

I now find it impossible to watch more than two minutes of a Canadian news cast - the extreme left wing bias is nauseating and predictable. Thank God for Fox News.

It's a real Obamarama, they've got the beat going out of control. Do they hock each other's headlines?

CBC fixtures like Nancy Wilson are embarrassing to say the least. There's not a chance of balanced reporting with the one track mindset so rampant throughout all our media. It's blatant huckstering.

They ain't fooling anyone but have to wonder how stupid do they think we are?

While I realize that editors have to make decisions as to what the lead story should be, the fact that the majority are really left bent scares me. I think Spiderman got a fairer shake from J. Jonah Jameson than Bush gets from the MSM. Or any conservatives get for that matter.

I seem to recall a study that showed that journalists (and I use that term loosely) do not reflect the profile of the general public but it doesn't prevent them from trying to influence them.

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=404190&cid=21890376

I have worked in and around newsrooms from college on and I know, firsthand, where much of the problem lies. Journalism, that is, the finding and reporting of facts, has little to do with a journalism major, which is primarily interested in "the proper form." As the article says, "the emotional center," or, more specifically, an insulated and insular group of people attempting to capture the attention of the audience.

There was a study done on mid-level news markets about eight or nine years ago, and what they found is that reporters have a lot in common with one another. They tend to rent, not to buy. (This is quite understandable, as "two weeks notice" doesn't happen in news; more often a person finds out of Friday that they don't need to come back on Monday.) They tend to live in the city rather than suburban or rural areas. (Again, understandable given the commute.) They tend to be single rather than married (stability issues again) and use certain services more than others-- transit, fitness centers, and so on. The upshot was that the necessary living patterns for reporters-- again, not big-city reporters, but mid-market types-- meant both that a certain point of view was attracted to the lifestyle, and that the point of views of the people involved would necessarily change.

And that viewpoint-- we're not talking political here, though it does play a role-- agrees with 2% of the wider US population. Two percent.

Or in other words, the viewpoints of 98% of the population are foreign to the average reporter. Moreover, the average reporter is your typical person, which by and large means the vast majority of them are, basically, lazy. How many of you just get through your day, doing the basic minimum that your job requires? Well, imagine what that's like as a reporter, when you don't have somebody breathing down your neck to report the facts, but instead have them breathing down your neck to "find the emotional center." That reporter's going to find the emotional center, and is almost certainly going to do so using a mental template (Insert Issue A into Slot B and add Cute Kid/Pet/Quip at end.) You end up with lazy reporting.

Lazy reporting gets you those stories about farmers that always seem to imply that they must be hicks, or slow, or obsessed with "weird things" because they aren't smart/hip/normal enough to move to the city, like "real people." Or the ones that as what [X racial group] thinks about a subject, as if a vast group of people who share a few alleles must have similar opinions. Or, in the most common template of them all, the good little underdog against the evil corporation/city council/religious group.

Why do I get my news online? Because a well-done story, linked back to source documents and complete transcripts, is yards and away from "San Francisco tiger mauls two and kills one; blood and guts at eleven" (past teasers and grainy footage and the obligatory Horrified Bystander.) I know what news is, and I don't confuse it with reality-entertainment.

They are all gonna freak when the Republicans take the white house again.

Obama is appealing to the emotional side of the loons just like Martin Luther King did except in this case there is no substance whatsoever. He won't appear on any serious interview show such as O'Reilly and for that matter neither will Hillary. Neither of them answer questions with any conviction. Hillary doesn't ever answer any question ever. She has only the desire to be president and nothing more. That is psychopathic.

What the hell is renewal? What is changing America? I'd say the George Bush has already done all the changing and the Dems want to change it all back to pre 9-11. Welllllll, you can't do that. 9-11 happened no matter how much do want it to have happened. We have very bad enemies and we need a warrior in the white house, not a wimp or an opportunist.

Rudy will win at best and at worst Romney will take it.

If the media took a moment to reveiw the dems policy on trade they may want to restrain their love fest for Obama. He will be no friend of Canada. My bet their are collecting tape to feed to Dion,Canada's Obama...

Now let us look at the news manufacturing industry.
From this perspective, it looks as thought the people that are responsible for the news are irresponsible. You read something in the newspaper and then you read the real story, (viz, yesterday’s Spinning for Khamenei - "When journalists use ellipses, Posted by Kate at 12:31 AM) and they don’t mach, what do you do?
In this area, sort of deep south Okanagan daily (relative to BC) “Pentincton Herald”. The paper is full of the stuff like, these people collected money for this, these other people are doing good over there, then there is this group that is feeding somebody.
While these maybe in many cases good causes, when you want to read news, you really don’t care to read that kind of stuff, (or maybe You do).
It is seriously irritating when you can’t read the news for its own sake, so to speak. It may be true that there is not much going on in the area at this time of the year (it’s pretty much in hibernation) there are other places, other countries, other continents that have things happening.
As related to the big papers, The Calgary Herald, once it was wrestled out of the hands of socialists, became pretty solid and level headed paper with an excellent staff. Don Martin resided there before moving to the east. Another columnist that could irritate hell out of some of us was Katherine Ford though she was not necessarily a socialist, she just liked to stick pins and needles into people.
On the American side, the major newspapers are clearly socialist, mind you the columnists and the “journalists” make superior living, working for these papers; maybe they just feel real bad about that, though since they like the cash rewards they will pay lip to the plebeians.
So today, many (majority?) people can get the news, on regular bases, in the raw. They will decide what to think rather than have some “punk journalist” tell them what was “really” meant regarding an event, as opposed to what the event was actually about.
It is easy, right now, to look at the presidential primaries in the US and compare different on line papers, television reports and news radio. It is as though some of those “journalists” live on another planet or something. Opinion is one thing; news is another, the “journalists’ get confused more often than not as to what their job is. Maybe they, the ‘journalists’ don’t care, don’t know or are so superior they could not give a damn.
Is there no wander that most people that read the nonsense don’t care to be insulted?

I haven't heard such hype from the leftist media in Canada about a candidate (Obama) since Belinda Stonach wanted to lead the Conservatives.

At least Obama has read a few political science books - unfortunately none by Friedrich Hayek or Milton Friedman, it seems.

John West, I have to agree with you at this point that Rudy is the best option available in the field with a shot at being elected. As both a fiscal and social conservative, guys like Ron Paul and Fred Thompson are very appealing personally, but the role of able leadership in the leading western nation is so critical, you have to go with the one most likely to provide it, in spite of some social values one may disagree with. Did you read the David Warren article, linked on the PTBC page Kate is referencing here?
http://www.proudtobecanadian.ca/index/writergroup/when_things_fall_apart_we_need_leadership/

There just isn't anybody even close to the same calibre among the leading Dhimmicrats. It's scary to think it, but Hilary might just be the best they have. (Excuse me, have to go wash my mouth out.)

I agree with John West ,the GOP will retain the Whitehouse,just not sure who yet,but willing to wager it will not be Huckleberryhound,no matter what the canadian press do, they do not have a vote

Ron Paul is insane.

"Ron Paul is insane."

An insult to the insane everywhere.........

"An icon of hope:" The U.S. MSM has even less of an excuse than the Canadian MSM to gush but they're off and runny.

If anyone picks Hillory as a running mate, watch out. How many whites will vote for Obama to get over their guilt feeling for slavery, the civil war, the 1960 riots and whatever. American posters are telling him to stay out of small planes and parks.
And, how can any President be ready on day 1, Jan 21,09 to do anything, (except pardon all democrats in jail for whatever, and her big financial donor Hsu). First she/he has to get a cabinet nominated and then thru congress and the senate. And saying they will pull out troops NOW, means they accept that Iraq will still be at war.
Thought Nancy was going to stop it.
This is going to be a dirty vicious campaign on the democratic side. Considering when she first announced the entire media was saying she was invincible, the nomination was hers for the taking and her election was in the bag. Gee, I wonder what happened, she has a fight on her hands. She might win the nomination, but never be President.

Ron Paul is insane.

No kidding. I heard him speak for the first time tonight in the debate and I just kept asking myself, "What planet is this guy from?" It was also clear that no one took him seriously.

On the main topic of this thread: Yes, it is horrible how slanted towards the Democrats the coverage of the Iowa caucus has been - especially in Canada.

BUT...I must admit that I couldn't get enough of hearing how Hillary came in third and I can see how Obama's victory could legitimately be considered bigger deal than Huckabee's victory. After all, Rudy didn't run in Iowa - so the victory wasn't such an upset.

Of course, that doesn't justify the dramatic lop-sidedness of the reporting. And in Canada...well nothing justifies how our media works.

Please Lord , please, put the Incredible Huck in the White House.

I want to see all the little secular lefties in the CBC have a 19th nervous breakdown when they wake up on Nov 6 and Huck , a Baptist Minister and disc jockey, replaces their Bush Derangement Syndrome with HDS.

The Huck says it is not the vibrant economy stupid, it’s not the war that we’re winning … It’s about the same thing that Obama said which is :

“In lines that stretched around schools and churches, in small towns and in big cities, you came together as Democrats, Republicans and independents, to stand up and say that we are one nation. We are one people.”

Got that CBC ???.. one culture .. not 2 Solitudes not 200 Solitudes … but one sovereign country … Canada with no hyphens.

Huck to the CBC will be like kryptonite to Superman … they’ll just role over.

Then Harper can hopefully stitch this country back together again after a half century of appeasing all our liberty and individualism over to HRCs and every special interest group that got a hand out if they vote Liberal.

One more thing...texas canuck mentioned, "... journalists...do not reflect the profile of the general public"

I recall hearing recently that some poll showed that 90-something percent of US journalists vote Democrat - which makes the media the most reliable demographic group that the Democrats have.

Sorry the post: Posted by: Lev at January 5, 2008 9:50 PM
Should applies to the "Not Waiting For The Asteroid"
Thank you for your understanding.
Cheers

Laura Ingraham made the point tonight on the O'Reilly Factor that the American political journalist pundits draw their conclusions by TALKING TO EACH OTHER!
Geez, that not news, we've known for decades that's how Canadian journos continually write up their political stuff.
Leftist group / herd Canadian MSM political coverage.

Please Lord , please, put the Incredible Huck in the White House.

p>

Huckabee isn't a conservative. Other than that, I hear you, but that one factor is a drawback to some of us.

Question: Until today I could have cared less. Is Obama islamic? Or maybe more prudently, were his parents?

"Ron Paul is insane.
No kidding. I heard him speak for the first time tonight in the debate and I just kept asking myself, "What planet is this guy from?" It was also clear that no one took him seriously.

Posted by: bryceman at January 5, 2008 10:37 PM"

This is probably the wrong thread for it, but I would like to see some discussion of this. I've heard others refer to him as "from the 19th century" but that probably makes him less insane than almost anyone on the left. Most of my knowledge of Ron Paul relates to his concerns about unsound fiat money, and given that all fiat money in the history of the world has depreciated, most of it to zero value, that would not seem to be an unreasonable concern. And while he may seem to be obsessive about it, somebody needs to be, and you don't hear much on this from any of the other candidates.

But I'm willing to hear more as to why he is insane from anyone here.

at least the gop know the name of our Primeminsiter and know he is a PM
Obama and Clinton and Edwards dosen't even know that Canada has a Primeminister Obama called him President Harper, that was hilarious
Rudy Guliani know the Pm is called Primeminister Harper the best of the bunch. Clinton said that PM was a nice liberal. and said she is sure the pm Martin would do well with the dems in power.

Yeah , Drained Brain, I know. Maybe I’ve come to hate the CBC more than I love conservatism, maybe I better sleep on it … :>)

As a Canadian I have no say in how the Americans run their country but if I were to eliminate two candidates, one from either side, both Hillary and Huckabee would be gone. Hillary for all the obvious reasons, liar, power hungry, lack of ethics, etc. Huckabee because as a Christian I view the call to preach the highest calling while politics is one of the lower callings. That someone would trade the pulpit for power, I like Pope John Paul II, find disturbing.

As one Roman wag once etched in stone, "There are but two things, Love and Power and no man can have both". Another famous Roman citizen wrote "and the greatest of these is Love".

I just noticed the coverpage on today's Globe and Mail about how the United States had "grown" and "matured" to the point where they could think about electing a black man to be President of the United States.

Fair is fair, I thought.

How about a headline in next week's New York or Los Angeles Times talking about how Canada has "grown" and "matured" to the point where they could think about electing an Aboriginal Man to be Prime Minister of Canada.

noticed all of that right away. Even the headlines all manage to start with 'Obama'. First half of the article? Always Obama. Huckabee gets second fiddle, always. But then again, is it any wonder? We will continue to point out the obvious (albeit not necessarily intentional) left-leaning bias present in our news media until we are blue in the face, but they still won't get what we're complaining about because they are in a completely different mindset; that is, a liberal one.

Don't get me wrong I would NOT vote for a democrat but the only one who really looked bad in the debate this evening was Obama.

Even Hillary managed to get some laughs, but Obama looked like he was not a happy camper.

And to my surprise after the debate on ABC Diane Sawyer and george ( Greek last name I can't remember ) also said Obama did not look so good in the debate...

*
The Big "E"

I'm fresh off watching resident pinko-pundit David Akin on the CTV news...
lauding Hillary Clinton's "loads of experience."

*

Re: the volume of coverage on Obama vs. Huck.

While I haven't seen any of the CBC's primary coverage - why would I or anybody for that matter? It's like trying to get sound analysis of the CFL from an L.A. radio station - I have no doubt that it is slanted pro-democratic way that most casual CDN viewers who have no idea what's happening in the US like Paul Wells for example.

However I agree with Rush's take on the coverage. Essentially he said that THE story is huge - much bigger than the GOP's vote for two reasons:

1. Obama is the first black man to win a caucus/primary EVER. (And he won it by getting support from white voters - not block-black voting.)

2. That the vote was a complete repudiation of the deomcratic party elite - that Hillary's kind of 'change' is not the kind of change they looking for.

Obama has found his target now let's see what he can do with it. Apparently, tonight's debate did not go well for him.

And even though he has to combat the very entrenched Hillary organization, the sources I read say that he will have far more money to fight her with than she will from here on.

I listened to part of his "victory" speech in Iowa and have never heard so many empty platitudes strung together in a very long time. And while I'm rooting for Fred, I was genuinely impressed at the way Huckabee can project and connect without without raising his voice.

It took me a while to figure out why he sounded familiar, and then I realized he reminds me of Stuart McLean of the Vinyl Cafe.

Say what you like about his evangelical support, but if this guy gets significant one-on-one communication time with the American voter, he's going to go somewhere on his likeability alone.

Piper Paul - 9:33 pm.

That was the finest post I have seen in a long time. I'm going to copy & send it to a friend of mine.

Thanks

From the media point of view, when you only earn 1800 a month you are going to champion anyone who promises a free ride ie: Hildabeast,Dijon,E.Jack U. Layton, Brian Mason and any other lying leftie, hell that's human nature.

[quote]I agree with John West ,the GOP will retain the Whitehouse,just not sure who yet,but willing to wager it will not be Huckleberryhound,no matter what the canadian press do, they do not have a vote [/quote]

Lanarklady,
The obvious Dem's choice will be Obama/Edwards ticket The usual North/South.

The Republicans may counter with McCain or Rudy
with Condi Rice (black female)as VP. The options are wide open once the witch is dead.

A comparison of US vs. Canada
Moderate Dem or Rep = Canadian Conservative (Bill Clinton was Mod Dem)
Democrat left = Canadian Liberal or NDP

The Canadian liberal is just an NDP all dressed up. I don't know who stole from whom.

CBC: I have noticed that if I have to listen to CBC radio (my wife likes it) I have a sudden need to Shower & have to suppress urges of self-mutilation, cutting off my offending arms. The CBC must hate their audience, feeding depressing stories after depressing Stories.(Yes! stories plural) Just turning them OFF may save a trip to a head doctor to restore ones self worth.

There's no excuse for the wall-to-wall Democrat coverage before the results were in BUT...

Folks, the Obama story was a bigger deal than the Huckabee story. Clinton was not just the front-runner, she was the juggernaut Now she is in third! And there is no reason to believe her fortunes will improve.

Huck, on the other hand, beat a man most Americans don't know. Most recent polls predicted it. Since Iowa is a uniquely good state for Huck, He is not the front-runner.

john west, i agree. he is also an extreme socialist. azphiks, his father was a muslim. kate, definately empty words, saying nothing with gusto to try and sound as if he is saying something.

Young people will vote for Obama, they don't have any race hangups, not like 60+ people do. I forecast too that the young will vote in this election in big numbers if Obama is the dems candidate.

tranio says "Young people will vote for Obama, they don't have any race hangups, not like 60+ people do".

I disagree, I believe that many of them will vote for a black candidate, ANY black candidate, to 'prove' to themselves and their friends that they are 'unbiased'.

And they won't see the irony.

Thompson/McCain in 2008

In response to an earlier question:

As I've posted on other threads, according to his website, Obama attends Trinity United Church. Ostensibly, this makes him a "Christian" but I'm not convinced that the United Church actually believes in Christ...

It's more than a safe bet the Republicans will retain the White House.
Huckabee would be a good name for the Leftoids here to get used to, they could choke on it, Huck..Huck..spitoowee, as they learn the new name to link Harper to.

So here we go, the Harper-Bush collaboration becomes the Harper-Huckabee collaboration.

The Kanukistani MSM is an endless loop tape of recycled ideological/partisan messaging...as a result I believe Canadians who rely on it for their information to be the most uniformed population in the Anglospere...our news is filtered through a partisan template and the MSM opinion is limited to homogeneous mantra chanting of Trudeaupian dogmatics.

Canadian media is what the Borg would design to keep a population single minded and narrowly focused.

WLMR....."single minded and narrowly focused", is exactly what's being spewed at us. We have to hope and even pray the majority of the people here are smart enough to see through their obfuscations.

Liz J. on the CBC: "They ain't fooling anyone but have to wonder how stupid do they think we are?"

If they think about most of us at all, yeah, I'm sure they think we're stupid--or, if not stupid, then quite unworthy or undeserving of any of their attention: Hey, they're being paid well. The only thing most of us are deserving of, in the CBC-mind, is contempt.

And the truly galling thing is, if the CBC wasn't slurping $1.2 billion from the public trough, they'd be starving for revenue, a fact which makes their smug self-righteousness all the more infuriating (picture I'm-Peter-Mansbridge-and-you're-not, Wendy Mesley, Ian Macdonald, Brian Stewart, Nancy Wilson, Lesley MacKinnon, Susan Ormaston, Keith Boag, Carol McNeil...I could go on, but I've got better things to do with my life...).

Watching the talk shows, it appears Bill Clinton is upset at the media and their love affair with Obama. Strange, he had no complaints when the same media covered up all his little affairs, failure to get OBL and other things. If he angers the media, could they turn on him and bring up all those little things to really finish Hillory off. What is scarry is, if she is elected, and the clinton machine stays in place, she will steam roll democrats in congress and the senate, as they will be afraid to cross her and have the machine go after them. Can anyone imagine Bill on the Supreme Court. That alone is enough to vote against her.

That's quite the list of puke inducing spinners 'been around the block. I'll take a pass on Ian MacDonald, if you mean L Ian and not Neil, the total write-off. Isn't he the bird they keep moving around due to complaints?

L Ian is a pretty straight shooter IMO.

Gee, did the Canuckistan media have something to say about the Iowa vote? I must have entirely missed ALL of it.

Advertisers, take note.

And on cbc news Sunday,they turn to Susan Sarandon for her analysis of the US election.Carol drools over her..praises her stand on Iraq.Am watching now,should ruin my breakfast!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_XfP9bYO7o&feature=related

O'Reilley "gently removes" Obama henchman from in front of the camera and calls him an SOB. Over at the G&M the monbiots are going nuts.

copulentis: "Rudy is the best option available in the field with a shot at being elected" I think that John McCain would be a very good bet for the Republicans and someone that many Americans would support.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7L40blhu5Y&feature=related

Bill O'Reilly says "We like you" to Obama.

Liz J: Yup, you're right.

It's NEIL Macdonald I meant, not Ian. Thanks for pointing that out. Neil is a left-wing, conservative-hating, bigotry-spewing toady who, a few nights ago, I see is reporting from Washington.

'Not a city I like, but I don't think it's a demotion for him. He's beginning to look like the fat cat he is. Fat, smug, and not right.

Friend of USA: "Obama looked like he was not a happy camper." This is an interesting observation. Obama's big Achilles heal (as I see it) is his lack of experience. Could he have entered the race with the thought that it would give him profile, perhaps a shot at the VP . . . rather than actually expecting to win at this stage. He has only been in the Senate for two years and may have gotten himself in over his head. I believe that a Clinton/Obama ticket would take things.

Canadian MSM could be the subject of a great movie. "I see left-wing liberal biased media people. They're everywhere. And they don't know they're left-wing liberal biased." Is Bruce Willis available? I agree with many of the posts above. I don't even bother listening to CBC's national news report anymore lest I get nauseated. I have a little more patience for CTV, although I immediately reach for the remote when Craig Oliver or Bob Fife give us an "unbiased" editorial.

Ron Paul:
Wants to secure America's borders

Bring America's military back home from
the over 100 foriegn outposts they are now manning

Doesn't believe in "anchor babies"

Wants to reduce Washington's "out of control spending"

Is against the SPP agreemnt

The list goes on and on.........

Surely this doctor /veteran/comgressman...is insane

Or maybe not?

It's also telling that the MSM play up the Obama story of the Iowa caucus win but no mention yet of the 10% showing of Ron Paul who they all have been telling us would not pull 3%.

Even the Rightbot media and the talkshow conservatives are ignoring this GOP phenomina of populist support...a major story IMHO as this hasn't been seen in Presidential campaigns in a long time...even Nader and Perot did not garner this much grass roots support and populist activism....but the MSM continues their blackout of the Ron Paul momentum.

Very telling of MSM alignments...they truly are influence pimps.

On QP this am,Bob Fife is the new Minister of Foreign affairs!What a load that was..gives Bob Rae(the ndp/lib) lots of time to criticize Bernier,and the Cons on FA,as well as Paul Dewar(get out of Afstan.now)Lots of his own critique,and advice about what gov't should be doing in Kenya,Pakistan.I think all that red/blonde hair dye has affected his brain.

Speaking of Nader, where is he hiding these days?
Is he so confused he's not sure when or where to jump in and HELP somebody?

Obama Hussein's dirty little secret:

"American presidential frontrunner, Barack Obama has some very ugly skeletons in the closet in Kenya. Apart from his family links to Islam, it seems that Obama has some pretty bloodthirsty, extremist friends in the country.

In April 2007, a New York Times article had some interesting comments to make about Obama’s family. Sarah Hussein Obama of Kenya, Barack Obama’s stepgrandmother, is a lifelong Muslim. “I am a strong believer of the Islamic faith,” she says.

But the real shock comes this past weekend as Raila Odinga, Obama’s friend, lost the election in Kenya. First some background on Odinga:

Raila Odinga has, in his own words, a “close personal friendship” with Barrack Hussein Obama Junior. When Obama went to Kenya in August of 2006, he was hosted by Raila and spoke in praise of him at rallies in Nairobi… Obama’s bias for his fellow Luo was so blatant that a Kenya government spokesman denounced Obama during his visit as Raila’s “stooge.”

…Raila has now made a deal for support from the Soviets’ successors as world-champion enemies of the West and democratic freedoms: Muslim fundamentalists… The Evangelical Alliance of Kenya has posted on its website a photograph copy of a Memorandum of Understanding, dated and signed on August 29, 2007, between Raila Odinga and Shiekh Abdullah Abdi, chairman of the National Muslim Leaders Forum of Kenya.

Here is a summary on the agreement which was signed:

* It pledges the support of Kenyan Moslems for Raila’s election. In return, as President of Kenya, Raila agrees to 14 actions, listed a) through n) on page two.

* Within 6 months re-write the Constitution of Kenya to recognize Shariah as the only true law sanctioned by the Holy Quran for Muslim declared regions.

* Within one year facilitate the establishment of a Shariah court in every Kenyan divisional headquarters. [Note: everywhere in Kenya, not just in “Muslim declared regions.”]

* “Popularize Islam, the only true religion… by ordering every primary school in Kenya in the regions to conduct daily Madrassa classes.”

* “Impose a total ban on open-air gospel crusades by worshippers of the cross…”

* “Outlaw gospel programs… on KBC, the National Broadcaster.”
* “Impose a total ban on the public consumption of alcoholic beverages…”

* “Impose an immediate ban on women’s public dressing styles that are considered immoral and offensive to the Muslim faith…”

Obama then, is revealed as a sympathizer with hardline Islamist Sharia government and the mainstream press is NOT REPORTING ON THIS.

As far as his United (Universalist) Church affiliation, they believe Christ was simply a prophet, so their teachings mesh very well with Islam.

(ibloga.blogspot.com, atlasshrugs)

I'm for Fred Thompson, though, he seems to be slipping. I also believe, particularly in a time of war, the democrats will fail again. I don't think either a female or an inexperienced freshman with disturbing Muslim ties will be elected.

The meltdown will be a thing of beauty.

Liz J,

I believe Ralph backed Edwards. I always find it hard to take a super rich lawyer seriously engaging in class warfare.....Edwards will blow up like a rear ended Pinto, thar be skeletons thar.

Hillary, experience making change.....right....so has Nancy reagan and Laura Bush. Dont buy the co-presidency, it is a bad bad thing.

Obama, unpopular opinion here, but I find lots to like about him personally. I also dont find him full of the radically stoopid like Hillary and Edwards, but time will tell. I like his temperment quite honestly.

On GOP side

I like McCain, he can get too cranky for me.

Laconic Fred hilds a lot of appeal to me. Reminds me of a reagan conservative...no offense to some but he isnt beholden to the evangelical wing of the GOP.

Ron Paul, he I like some of the mor elibertarian positions but the fact that he has attracted the 9/11 truthers and some other unsavoury supporters makes me very very cautious. Kate may well be right.

Huck...agree with our hostess that he has a great skill of connection. He is hard to hate, as is Obama. That is the connection between these two candidates. However, Huck will likely fade but Chuck Norris may just pull him through. Oh and he has been a governor, that really does count for something.

Rudy....Has some appeal. Another terorist attack and his appeal goes up. He is a Rockafellar Republican....he is the kind of GOP guy that could actually win Califonia, depending on who he was up against. But he could also lose Texas. He was a mayor/CEO of a small state. That also counts for something.

Interesting race on all sides, we shall see. Makes you wonder if Al Gore will make the run, but I think he is making too much money still. The joweled one may run 2012 if there is a Jimmy Carter like dem presidency, play the Teddy Kennedy role.

I will tell you what I like most about Obama and Huckabee, they are breaks from the machine. Breaks from Kennedy's, Clintons Bushes etc. Thats part of what I like about Harper....not an elite, not part of the machine, although becoming so as is the nature of being a PM.

Time for something and someone different. That is the zeitgeist in the US right now, all subject to change because it is 10 months till election day. Lots can happen, not the least of which comes from outside the US.

[quote]Obama, unpopular opinion here, but I find lots to like about him personally. I also dont find him full of the radically stoopid like Hillary and Edwards, but time will tell. I like his temperment quite honestly [/quote]

Stephen,
He actually is running to the center! I liked his comments RE: Sierra Club at the 100 club Dinner. "I will not give a check to the Sierra club, like GW Bush (Cafe), but visit the auto Industry in Detroit" This may be a message to the CA group to get on his train NOW or Kiss my butt... or he may be honest.

His GW stand is not unreasonable, if I understand what he said. He is not buying the (Simple Simon}fossil fuel supply side allocation. (X number of units In = X number of emissions) If a Coal fired plant were in the middle of a Natural sink, they would only pay for their atmospheric "measured" emissions. This would discourage scientific CHEATS or friends of Gore.

The Obama/Edwards combination will be hard to beat... They will have Teflon protection. The Obama/Edwards connection was obvious on ABC
debate & that normally only happens at the Convention. Obama may just sweep the primaries.

MSM Every journalist has a personal opinion and it’s hard to extract fact for fiction unless you have inside information. I don't see anything unusual, from my understanding, of US MSM.

"True" Professionals that never fake news
Carl Cameron (Fox)
Lisa Myers (NBC, Wash DC)