I'm not a great observer of American elections and I'm not following this one particularly closely. But one thing has stood out and I want to run it by ye. Every time media coverage comes up, the McCain side start about media bias towards Obama. I understand that there was a poll conducted which said that 49% of Ameriasns thought that coverage was biased in Obama's favour, or something to that effect. One fellow on Newsnight, said it was a 'given' that Obama got more favourable press.

I myself think that the two get about equal coverage, but I'm not really looking into the matter. But I think I've seen more coverage of this supposed bias than I've seen favourable reports on Obama himself. People certainly believe he gets more favourable coverage, but does this belief reflect the reality? It's academic I suppose, but I'd like to know if it's true.

I'm sick to the back teeth about Obama. He has gotten an easy ride since the beginning of this whole presidential race. The New Yorker cover is about the most negative thing which has cropped up in the US media about him, which is a surprise considering he's unqualified to be president.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

I'm sick to the back teeth about Obama. He has gotten an easy ride since the beginning of this whole presidential race. The New Yorker cover is about the most negative thing which has cropped up in the US media about him, which is a surprise considering he's unqualified to be president.

Jesus A-T don't you read the Irish Times on Monday? Try Krauthammer's take on Obama, he gets prety nasty. And hilarious. It's the only exposure I get to American media and it's negative, so maybe I'm not the greatest judge.

Obama is becoming the new Lisbon though.

905 wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

I'm sick to the back teeth about Obama. He has gotten an easy ride since the beginning of this whole presidential race. The New Yorker cover is about the most negative thing which has cropped up in the US media about him, which is a surprise considering he's unqualified to be president.

Jesus A-T don't you read the Irish Times on Monday? Try Krauthammer's take on Obama, he gets prety nasty. And hilarious. It's the only exposure I get to American media and it's negative, so maybe I'm not the greatest judge.

Well the radical right are angry about everything, so they're just a white noise of pointless impotent rage at this stage.

Quote :

Obama is becoming the new Lisbon though.

Ugh. Hand me that whiskey and wake me up in January.

905 wrote:

Obama is becoming the new Lisbon though.

What they should run the selection process again?

Personally I think there will be a lot of disappointed people when this particular charlatan is elected. There has been a severe case of the Emperors New Clothes. Question is will it last until November?

For no other purpose than to lower the tone of the site.

Gross, Squire, gross. Très très vulgaire!

No. All fluff and no stuff. 

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

I'm sick to the back teeth about Obama. He has gotten an easy ride since the beginning of this whole presidential race. The New Yorker cover is about the most negative thing which has cropped up in the US media about him, which is a surprise considering he's unqualified to be president.

More unqualified than an actor, or an oil baron, or an oil baron's moron son ?

FFS, He's no genius, but what president ever was. BO is the business imho compared to the rest. Though if McCain were to win I'd be 120 quid better off.

And that NY cover was an editorial embarassment, even for them. Stupid cover.

No shortage of presidents who were genius. Clinton was a Rhodes scholer. Clinton is ranked as one of those with the highest IQ. Wilson was a professor at Princeton. Wilson was the worst ever and even figured it out himself in later life. The other two were chronic

I thought his speech was poor. I think he and his team might come to regret pursuing this kind of strategy. Presenting Obama as being above the fray might have worked in the primaries but I think it should have been dumped as soon as he was declared the presumptive nominee. He should be streets ahead of McCain, an incredibly poor performer who looks old and tired in every sense.

He is also benefiting from the most inept Republican campaign in a very long time. Whoever is stage-managing McCains appearances should be fired immediately. If they get their act together, I don't believe it would be as difficult to nail Obama as the media like to make out.

I am not particularly enthused about either candidate. McCain will offer more of the same but with the added danger of a man who is angry and has nothing to lose. I would be marginally more effusive about the prospect of an Obama presidency. Not because I buy all this change rubbish, but because I think he might actually bring a diverse and competent team around him who might just have some of the answers to the challenges facing us.

Obama needs to stay above the fray because he is poor on the detail and specifics. Indeed I doubt if he truely knows what he is about. As for McCain words fail. He really should not be running. The VP is choice is of utmost importance in his campaign.

unaligned wrote:

...I would be marginally more effusive about the prospect of an Obama presidency. Not because I buy all this change rubbish, but because I think he might actually bring a diverse and competent team around him who might just have some of the answers to the challenges facing us.

Us?

We won't be voting for him and he won't be representing us. Except for youngdan perhaps.

Is the difference that MCain would send the troops in and Obama would bomb them from the skies, like Clinton?

The US has a stagnant economy that over the last presidencies has slid down to becoming a low wage economy. The underlying cause of the sub-prime crisis is that masses of people in the US can't afford housing on their wages. The latest is car parks in which middle class people pay to live in their cars.

From the 1980s the US has increasingly relied on low wage service employment - people have kept their living standards up through massive increases in personal debt and increases in the national debt as well as by taking a second job in Walmart. US manufacturing has migrated to Ireland, Mexico and elsewhere looking for lower wages, grants, tax breaks and ways around tariff barriers and what they have left is rust bucket stuff. Foreign adventures like Iraq have been a costly diversion and the US is seen pretty much as a dangerous lunatic on the world scene.

Leo Panitch, a Canadian economist, relates this to the breaking of the Labor Unions and the deregulation of the banks and financial firms.

LINK

Finding out what Obama would do if elected in this situation isn't easy as the press here report what sounds like a load of piffle " Hope - change - together blah blah blah" coming out of his mouth. He has made statements about stopping US firms globalise - how would he propose to do that I wonder? Not so easy.
A protectionist approach right now would kick a deep world recession in if there isn't one already. I would like to know if the man has any principles - he seems to be prepared to back down on Iraq - and invading Afghanistan is no better. Does anyone know if he has a manifesto with stated policies? I did a search but all I could find was youtube type soundbites.

Lestat wrote:

unaligned wrote:

...I would be marginally more effusive about the prospect of an Obama presidency. Not because I buy all this change rubbish, but because I think he might actually bring a diverse and competent team around him who might just have some of the answers to the challenges facing us.

Us?

We won't be voting for him and he won't be representing us. Except for youngdan perhaps.

You don't think it will matter to us who the next President of the United States is?

Cactus,

He has a few panderings on his website that could loosely described as something connected with policy. Such is the nature of modern politics, Fianna Fail don't even have a policy section on their website.

unaligned wrote:

You don't think it will matter to us who the next President of the United States is?

He will affect our lives in that his policies will have an inevitable knock on effect globally, but he won't be providing any answers for specific challenges facing Ireland.

Lestat wrote:

unaligned wrote:

You don't think it will matter to us who the next President of the United States is?

He will affect our lives in that his policies will have an inevitable knock on effect globally, but he won't be providing any answers for specific challenges facing Ireland.

Obviously not. I should have been more specific.

cactus flower wrote:

I would like to know if the man has any principles - he seems to be prepared to back down on Iraq - and invading Afghanistan is no better. Does anyone know if he has a manifesto with stated policies? I did a search but all I could find was youtube type soundbites.

I doubt if he has any principles, his position on many issues seems to change more frequently than the wind. As for a cogent manifesto here are the 'issues' if you consider nearest you will get to a manifesto, more a ramble in the woods.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

Squire wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

I would like to know if the man has any principles - he seems to be prepared to back down on Iraq - and invading Afghanistan is no better. Does anyone know if he has a manifesto with stated policies? I did a search but all I could find was youtube type soundbites.

I doubt if he has any principles, his position on many issues seems to change more frequently than the wind. As for a cogent manifesto here are the 'issues' if you consider nearest you will get to a manifesto, more a ramble in the woods.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

Thanks Obama's "Blue Print for Change" starts with anticorruption anticorporate stuff - I'll need to read it before I post any more onto this thread.

If Obama gets in we will see some real wars, not the skirmishs that we have seen thus far.. The lad pulling the strings for Obama is Zigniev Brezinsky. Authur of The Grand Chessboard and a hawk against Russia and China. The strategy is already forming to lead to a breakup of Pakistan to remove it as a Chinese ally. Another Chinese client that would be getting the shaft is Sudan. Some of the Obama fans are so lame brained to think anyone gives a bollix about a few lads getting killed in Dhafur so it will be sold as a humanitarian mission. Obama is dangerous because he seriously misunderstands the mindsets of the Russians and Chinese.

It is by no means a given that he will be elected even though he is running against a senile fool. He has a bill in the Senate now about global poverty and when the Americans read it they should realise that this lad is a fruitcake like never before seen in politics here. If he was running against even Romney he would be a joke.

However, the old saying in politics is You can not beat somebody with nobody. McCain is nobody

Does Obama have anything to propose apart from being black, or, to put it differently, is being black a virtue per se? Do you hire a black doctor because he is black or because he is a good doctor?

Is the American left nowadays merely about following a right-wing agenda for the country, with the mere addition of symbolically promoting a few individuals from minorities, in order to keep superficially different from the right?

youngdan wrote:

If Obama gets in we will see some real wars, not the skirmishs that we have seen thus far.. The lad pulling the strings for Obama is Zigniev Brezinsky....

Do you have any good news?

Brzezinski is a bit long in the tooth though. He was Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser and he is now over 80. Hard to see him having that much influence with the Young Turks.

arnaudherve wrote:

Does Obama have anything to propose apart from being black...

The people he hung about with before his campaign for nomination would not encourage you to think so. It appears to me in my ignorance of US politics that he is popular on the basis of not being republican. But after the Bush era you have to ask how much policy does the President propose. Like Bush will Obama be just another front for crazies who want to create a new world order based on a Pax Americana.

I rarely have good news. Lads like Brezinsky never give up. Kissinger and George Shultze are still actine and the boogie man of all David Rockefeller is tearing away at 93. In business Sumner Redstone is 85 and he thinks he is immortal.

My favourite is this kid. 91 and a half and still in thesenate https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYgXRU8gCls

youngdan wrote:

...Lads like Brezinsky never give up...

Granted. But Obama has about 300 foreign policy advisers. One is Brzezinski's son, Mark. Admittedly they have different specialties and some are closer to the centre than others but BO mightn't necessarily listen to Brzezinski senior.