I don’t belong to any particular party but agree wholeheartedly sir!

It seems like you have nothing but hate inside for anyone who disagrees with you or posts something that you don’t like. I don’t take things that are personally so if I apologize if you were expecting a fight or a bunch of nasty dialogue. That approach to life drains me.

If you are upset with the Supreme Court regarding Roe vs Wade, and the preservation of marriage between a man and woman exclusively, I suggest that you contribute some of your hard earned money to support the legal efforts on behalf of those causes. Additionally, you might think of contributing your personal time to supporting your position in your community and perhaps go statewide. Your contributions on both fronts would be welcome. I don’t presume to know if you do these things, so please don’t be offended by my suggestion.

Regarding your comment where you disagree with me about the impact of a scandal by televangalists, I believe that our party was hurt by them and the congressional leaders that were involved in similar scandals. These people conducted themselves in ways that were shameful. Until we get back to our conservative roots and take steps to eliminate this behavior, we will be esposed to critics.

Regarding my political affiliation, I am a Republican closing in on 13th presidential election. Again, I don’t know why you want to hate and disparage my posts, but that is your right.

I don’t know if you are closed minded or anything else about you. I assume that you are a decent and kind person and I understand that you are upset about the election and all the information that is floating around, some fact some not so factual. It can be upsetting and bring out the worst in us … I had my share of rants about Clinton. I just don’t want to be that angry again about politics.

I want to win not whine about all of the crimes and misdemeanors that Obama has committed, will commit or how he will fail and the world will come to an end. For me that is a pitch black, dead end street with a thousand foot drop somewhere in that darkness …

The intent of my posts are not personal attacks or subtle attacks on anyone. I would like to see some positive progress on the rebuilding of the RP platform.

KJ

Daly missed the boat to control Obama when he decided to support Obama’s opponents both in 2000 and 2004. By 2005 Daly realized that he was obviously going to have to change his opinion of Obama since Obama was not going anywhere. In 2007 Daly finally officially supported Obama which of course was welcome but really more of an attempt by Daly to not be left behind.

Obama has always worked through the grassroots which ultimately was the correct strategy in today’s world. As a fellow Chicago community activist prior to moving out to California a couple of years ago I learned as well to make things happen it has to start at the bottom. The ability to connect the bottom to the top is how we progress. It is how I was able to help improve my own impoverished neighborhood deal with our plethora of issues and how I was able to put together and complete successful projects in the Gulf Coast post-Katrina; using the power of local people who are invested into thier community.

I will say it one more time, Obama is not congruent with Daly. Chicago is really the one connection there. Beyond that Daly had little use for Obama until he organized what sometimes were referred to as “Lakefront Liberals” but as a former lakefront resident I prefer to call it like it was, residents concerned for thier neighborhood looking for positive change.

That being said, of course the relationship is mutually beneficial for both parties. That being said, I ASSURE you the Obama Campaign was hardly ran by the Daly and the Chicago machine. If anything Obama is more likely to call out Daly on his sometimes ridiculous management of the great city of Chicago.

No, the Obama Campaign is something much greater than any Chicago politician could have devised! Believe me, I lived and worked in a decade and a half of it.

At no time in history has a presidential candidate raised as much money for a campaign as Obama. How is that possible? By deciding not to take party money when so much more can be made from the millions of Americans who vote. Those thousands of volunteers from California that I was privileged to work with did not canvas the Nevada nieghborhoods because of Chicago, they did it because they believe in a better world and are willing to roll up their sleeves and work for it. It is going to take work, but as long as everyone puts in the work tomorrow will be good. The success of Obama is not his alliances with other politicians, it is his ability to empower people, allow people to have a stake or an actual investment in our country. It is the equivalent of helping people become homeowners as opposed to renters.

I am not sure of what truth you speak of explicitely. I do recognize truth in some of your statements. Truth mingled with misrepresentation; however, is the most dangerous of lies and how Bush drove this nation into the ground. To say “the corruption of the Obama campaign is truth” is a misrepresenation at best and had I not believed that perhaps you are simply misinformed I would call it a slanderous statement.

If you don’t remember a thing about what I have said please at least remember to approach all things like a good historian; from the source. Source materials and the point of origin is the only place to find truth, anything else though perhaps present with truth is the truth seen through someone’s filter.

Don’t buy the program when you can change the channel.

Truth is an absolute defense against libel. The corruption of the Obama campaign is truth.

I realize it may have been an unintentional reference on your part but the Obama campaign should never be confused with the “Chicago machine.”

As one who spent 15 years living in the heart of beautiful Chicago it unfairly connotates a corrupt campaign with which Chicago has been historically notorious of.

If Obama were a Daly, I may let that term slide. He is not and as such it borders on libel.

“If it hadn’t been for Fox, I don’t know what I’d have done for the news,” Trent Lott, Washington Post, 2/5/01

The notion any of the major news media are “fair and balanced” is almost as ridiculous as suggesting the “main stream media” created the Obama movement.

I am actually quite fine with the news being slanted one way or the other as people generally are. It is silly for corporate news network to state that they are “fair and balanced.” You will rarely hear anything bad with the Republicans on the Fox news network just as you will rarely hear anything bad about Democrats on MSNBC.

I am not okay with the sensationalism they currently call journalism. The competition to be the first to reveal the latest gossip. Which is unfortunately what makes up the majority of “news” within the United States today.

Regardless, sensationalism is hardly some sort of liberal conspiracy that somehow mysteriously assured Obama’s victory. If the “press” (I will assume Melissa is talking about media with a liberal slant as opposed to the press as a whole) invested in anything it was the Clinton campaign.

Finally, Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (www.fair.org) said it perhaps best when they wrote:

With the ascendance of Fox News Channel, we now have a national conservative TV network in addition to the established centrist outlets. But like the mainstream networks, Fox refuses to admit its political point of view. The result is a skewed center-to-right media spectrum made worse by the refusal to acknowledge any tilt at all.

Fox could potentially represent a valuable contribution to the journalistic mix if it admitted it had a conservative point of view, if it beefed up its hard news and investigative coverage (and cut back on the tabloid sensationalism), and if there were an openly left-leaning TV news channel capable of balancing both Fox’s conservatism and CNN’s centrism.

LOL! Exactly…

Next time a Republican does something bad, watch major news corporation, Fox News. Watch that giant R turn into a giant D so the Repulican is associated with the Democrats.

I’m not a journalism major but I know what I’m talking about because I stayed at a Holiday Inn last night.