Joseph
There are a few associated angles to look at when it comes to Hillary Clinton's campaign. In the end, it has taken a would be front runner and lowered her standings in the Democratic primary. The media is 80% responsible for this tragic negative influence.
This seem to start with Chris Matthews, who devoted 90% of his show to bringing Clinton down. Matthews went from asking whether Barack Obama could beat Clinton to making sure it happened. We all know the special negative attention Matthews gave Clinton. I ask the question: What if Obama had to pay for the attacks made on his behalf by Matthews? Would he have the funding advantage he enjoys now? I think not.
CNN, who is supposed to be the "BEST" in the business, has a obvious ratio problem when covering the candidates that has always favored Obama. The worst of this one sided reality comes during every election coverage. However, I have scene other times when the ratio was 3/1 in favor of Obama, with the one also being associated with George Bush. Talk about throwing a dog a bone.
The funding issue amounted to Clinton trying to counter media attacks along with Obama's attacks. This amounts to undue influence in the Democratic primaries. I am sadden at the amount of influence the media had a hand in.
Much should come out of this year's primaries. One is how much influence and manipulation should the media be allowed to engage in.
Finally, I have wondered why the conservative media is so much in a hurry to have Obama be the Democratic candidate -- this very dynamic was stolen and used by the Obama camp. I lied; I know why the conservative media wants Obama to run against John McCain. Its not hard to figure out. They want the weakest candidate to run in the general election. This fact will come to reality when the bias Obama now enjoys turns into a bias McCain will enjoy.
Before the 2008 primaries, there was Iraq. It consumed the internet Blogs, and I am sure made for many heated debates. Our soldiers, since Vietnam, was dying in the streets of a foreign country for reasons not rooted in the truth. This story reminds me of the old saying: If you pour water on dried shit, it will smell just as fresh as it did when was first laid.
Opinions range from “we need to be there; if not, they will come to us,” to “our president invaded an innocent country and is responsible for the murder of at least a million people.” Although I tend to be of the later on the above opinion scale, I have to omit turning my head to focus on the up coming elections. So, “round two” is here and this topic still has a lot of energy associated with it. What will the renewed interest hold?
It appears some one is counting the many lies this administration told the American people. I have always contend the American people could not see the reality concerning the war even when it was right before their eyes. They refuse to connect the dots that brought us into the war, kept us fighting the war, and the misinformation campaign to keep us in the war.
This war is illegal, and as we continue to drop smart as bombs that seem to hit their target and the innocents around it, we fuel an insurgency that employ revengeful family members hell bent on killing our troops for what we call collateral damage. Yes, the topic is back, and recently I seem to hear more American casualties, not to down play the Iraqi casualties that double or triple ours.
If you follow the progression from the start to the current surge, we have been wrong at every step. In the past, now, and in the future, this war will be wrong and no amount of debate can change it. We need to get the hell out of Iraq.
Joseph