Friday, February 22, 2008

The Texas Debate

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama squared off in a debate for the 19th time, this time in the Lone Star State. Clinton needed for a major slip up by Obama to score a knockout punch, because by Billary's own admission, she needs to win in Texas and Ohio or her campaign is over. It was typical debate fodder with nothing new presented nor revealed.

Read the entire CNN article here.


plez sez: Obama did not slip up. and Clinton did not score a knockout. GAME OVER... is it just me, or are these debates getting old?

look for hillary clinton's concession speech on March 5th. you can read about her upcoming concession speech at the electronic village.

11 comments:

George Vreeland Hill said...

Just beat John McCain.
We don't want another George Bush, and that is what McCain is!
I am,

George Vreeland Hill

Villager said...

plez - Didn't Hillary's final answer seem like a preview of her concession speech?

peace, Villager

Hathor said...

It is still about the delegates. I wonder if enough would change during the first roll call. There may be many of a floor fight.

It doesn't look like he will have the magic number going into the convention.

lotus07 said...

The debates are like NASCAR racing. No one goes to see who wins, folks attend to see who crashes.

There was no crash last night (although Hillary getting booed and hissed was sort of sweet).

elme said...

In the debate Obama said he has been endorsed by every major newspaper in the state.

Seems a bit odd to me & bears wondering WHY?

Could it be ..... those advertising dollars .... the media lives by?

There is a pattern to be seen across all forms of the media; a pattern that has been going on throughout this campaign. That pattern is strikingly ABNORMAL: no criticism, no scrutiny, no questioning of Obama, no blame for anything; Nothing but Promoting HIM.

The other side of that coin is: criticism, scrutiny, questioning of HER every smallest word and move ... taken to absurd lengths, even blaming Clinton for things Obama did - (for example, he turned to negative campaigning, first, but the media blamed HER for it); nothing but slamming the Clintons.

This has been going on every day all day long in most of "the media". Lots of other people Noticed it too and posted their complaints about this sudden "media madness" on media matters website.

Curiously, the media ignores this highly Abnormal state of affairs - turns a blind eye to the Blatant absurdity of their "news" "coverage". Just a few months ago suddenly, overnight all the TV media turned into Faux News.

The media is failing to cover the Biggest Story of this election campaign: Their OWN Corporate Controlled FAILURE to do anything other than PROMOTE (SELL) their Corporate Masters Choice for Democrat Presidential Candidate: Barack Obama.

The question remains: WHY?

The deal killer for me on Obama for President is: 29 new nuclear power plants. The dirtiest, Un-Greenest, most expensive energy we can build.

Obama voted FOR the Cheney Energy Bill passed in 2005 (H.R.6) - which enables the nuclear industry to obtain financing for their 29 new nukes - by Guaranteeing TAXPAYER Payback of those loans .... in the event of DEFAULT....... which the Congressional Budget Office rated at 50% or greater. (No new nukes have been built in the U.S. for the past 30 years because the banks would not loan money to build them - too risky).

(.... .... & how would you like to take a quarter, or a half of everything you own .... whether that's $100, $5000, $1 Million, several $Billion .... go to Las Vegas & place it all on one roll of the dice --- which will get you --- double your money ..... or Nothing? NO PROBLEM.....IF.... like the NUKE industry ..... --- You Can't Lose ..... since your fellow citizens of the USA will give you All Your Money back. Do you Think that's capitalism, free enterprise?)

Now, Back to WHY?

McCain is in favor of building new nukes. Obama is in favor of building new nukes. Clinton is not and she voted AGAINST the Cheney Energy Bill.

Three consortiums are planning to build those 29 nukes. Major players in those consortiums are: Excelon, GE, Westinghouse.

Excelon is headquartered in ILLINOIS, Obama's 4th largest campaign contributor, sends lobbyists to see him.

GE owns NBC and MSNBC. Westinghoue owns CBS. They have many many thousands of products to ADVERTISE on TV, Radio, and in newspapers all over the USA. .... and they want to build those new nukes.
(GE is the 2nd largest corporation on the planet)

WHY has every major newspaper in Texas endorsed Obama? Got any idea yet?

WHY are NBC, MSNBC, CBS, CNN, PROMOTING Obama for President/Slamming the Clintons? Got any idea yet?

IF ELECTED, No matter what Obama might WANT to do .... does he have any chance of doing anything other than what the Corporations & the Corporate-controlled media who put him in the White House .... Want him to do?

Obama repeatedly says ..... that his campaign has been financed by .... we the little people ...... says .... he doesn't take a dime from federal lobbyists (Registered with the Federal goverment) but that's just lawyer legal-technicality-speak ..... because .... he does take money from REGISTERED Federal Lobbyist's wives, husbands, aunts, cousins, law partners, state lobbyists, not registered lobbyists, and all the same Big$$$ sources as Clinton.

Has the TV media ever Called Obama on his deceptive practice of fooling voters into believing he is fiananced by no one but the little people? No.
Has the TV media ever Reported the FACTS .... that his money comes from the same lobbys & Big$$ corporations as every other candidate? No.

That information is easily found on the internet. I know about it - don't the TV media people know about it? Sure, but they sure aren't telling you ... the little people. WHY?

WHY isn't the TV media telling you there's a real good chance Obama's chances of getting elected will go down the tubes ..... after Antoin Rezko of Chicago (aka Tony the Fixer) goes on trial February 25th - prosecuted by Patrick Fitzgerald on bribery, extortion, and money laundering charges?

Rezko's low-income property financing (federal loans) was handled by the 12-person law firm Obama worked for; Rezko was an Obama fund raiser since Obama's earliest days in politics; he was a member of Obama's campaign finance committee when Obama ran for U.S. Senate; some of the ....allegedly.... extorted money went into Obama's campaign coffers.


Heard about ANY of this On the TV "news"? No? Who's the REAL Reporter .... the TV Talking heads ..... or me?

plez... said...

elme,
let's go back to your initial question, "In the debate Obama said he has been endorsed by every major newspaper in the state. it seems a bit odd to me & bears wondering WHY?"

in your lengthy diatribe ripped straight from your Clintonista Talking Points memo, you never said why it would seem odd that every newspaper in the state would endorse the OBVIOUS front runner and better candidate. all of your blathering aside about Obama being a media darling, the fact remains that he has won more primaries & caucuses, he has received more votes, he has more pledged delegates, he is far more inspirational, he has a more concise message, he's raised more money, and he's had far more Americans donate to his campaign... than Hillary Clinton.

so i ask you, what is odd about him getting the most endorsements?

plez... said...

villager,

i must say that i grew weary of the debate and didn't make it to the end... so i didn't see her final standing ovation and concession speech! *smile* these debates have grown tiresome, lack any new revelations or substance... and why SHE wants to keep subjected herself to obvious rejection by democratic voters nationwide is beyond me... if she had asked me, i would've told her to call it quits after spending all that personal money ($5 million) and getting trounced in the Potomac Primaries!

Old Leadfoot said...

I would like to know: WHEN will Clinton finally admit her vote to allow Bush's war was a big fat mistake...? She never has....and apparently never will. In other words folks, if she had to do it all over again, she would do the exact same thing. THAT is where her troubles lie...she apparently hasn't been wrong about anything, ever. We're about as tired of the Clintons as we are of the Bushes. IT'S WAY PAST TIME FOR SOMETHING NEW. Obama is the only one offering us that....and that is why he will win.

Hillary = status quo.

Old Leadfoot said...

I would like to know: WHEN will Clinton finally admit her vote to allow Bush's war was a big fat mistake...? She never has....and apparently never will. In other words folks, if she had to do it all over again, she would do the exact same thing. THAT is where her troubles lie...she apparently hasn't been wrong about anything, ever. We're about as tired of the Clintons as we are of the Bushes. IT'S WAY PAST TIME FOR SOMETHING NEW. Obama is the only one offering us that....and that is why he will win.

Hillary = status quo.

Veronica Blue said...

I wonder if Obama's concession speech on November 4, 2008, will be as gracious as Hillary's after she loses the nomination. I hope the McCain folks don't call Obama names like the Obama folks are calling Hillary. I guess we can only hope for the best.

plez... said...

Oh Veronica... what a sad puppy you have become...

FIRST, it seems as though you should concern yourself with mccain's concession speech in november.

SECOND, i have no doubt that mccain's folk have already called Obama some pretty ugly names... big deal!