Jim Kennedy,
You are responding to issues and "facts" that I have not made. As Jim Nugent said, my comments on the main were in reference to the way Obama has handled the media. I am unaware that I brought up Bush except on the specific point of the media's characterization of the 2005 inauguration's cost. I am, however, painfully aware- I've heard or seen it nearly every day in the media for the last eight years- that he is despised by a large segment of the population.
My alleged biases aside, I like some aspects of Senator Obama. He is articulate, comes across warmly, and seems to have a nice family. Most importantly, regardless of how it was done, he has achieved phenomenomly in the public sector. However, at the end of the day, the man is a socialist and few good things will spring from his initiatives.
Mike Sweeney,
If you don't know the definition of Big Media (BM), I'll let Mr. Mucci educate you. I'll also defer to your fingers and whatever search engine you prefer to glean the left's position on the 2005 (but, what the hell, here is but one sampling-
http://www.highbeam.com/Search.aspx?q=2005+inauguration+spending ).
As to being smart (or not) or lazy, you may wish to re-read what I wrote then re-consider. I never questioned Obama's spending on his inauguration. Like CEO salaries, in the scope of the real numbers involved, they are a pittance, a red-herring. My only point regarding the inaugurations' costs was specifically about how BM chose to characterize them. But Mike, what do they say about pointing fingers (one at the accused, three at the accuser)?
Regarding your friend Henry and your pedophile priest, many of us have known people who've committed serious crimes and more than a few of us have done things that we're not proud of. But so what? Are you saying that this is analogous to Obama's situation with Rezko? I doubt that you took money from either of these people and otherwise benefited financially while they were commiting their crimes. As Mr. Kennedy suggested earlier, the proof required in a courtroom to link Obama to Chicago crime figures probably doesn't exist. Do smart people not vet campaign contributions and the motivations behind sweetheart real estate deals? I mostly think they do.
Lastly, just for my own curiousity, had you come across Michael Moore or even Katie Couric interviewing people on the sidewalk, would you have felt compelled to yell at him or her? Just trying to assess your claim of being an "independent" (perhaps I should refer this over to Mr. Mucci for definition).
Dan King,
I don't remember the source of my information. But you, the master of the internet search, can certainly find it if your motivation is to seek "the truth". You can denude any study, particularly when dealing in the social sciences. Admitedly, the scholarship in many of these is not particularly impressive.
Again, I am not whining about the left wing media. It is what it is and we should recognize it accordingly. My whine is when it represents itself as something that it clearly is not.
So, you think the conservative "collective" should do something about "infiltrating" BM? Here I thought that taking responsibility is an individual thing. I'll have to see what one of my favorite authors Ann Colter thinks about this.
