"Democratic pollster" Caddell: If Obama or Richardson sought votes based on their race/ethnicity, "people would hang them high"
On the February 23 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, Fox News contributor Pat Caddell asserted that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's (D-NY) presidential campaign is "saying, 'Vote for me because I'm a woman' " and declared, "If [Sen.] Barack Obama [D-IL] was out there saying, 'Vote for me because I'm black,' or ... [Gov.] Bill Richardson [D-NM] said, 'Vote for me because I'm a Hispanic,' people would hang them high." Co-host Sean Hannity introduced Caddell as a "former Democratic pollster."
As Media Matters for America noted, Caddell often appeared on cable news programs during the 2004 presidential campaign, apparently as a counterbalance to Republican contributors. Yet, on almost every occasion, Caddell attacked the Kerry-Edwards campaign and the Democratic Party, reinforcing Republican pundits' attacks rather than refuting them, a pattern of Caddell's since the mid-1990s. For instance, during the September 15, 2004, edition of Hannity & Colmes, Caddell compared The New York Times to "the czar's secret police," suggested that the so-called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth deserved to appear on NBC's Today, and said of Democratic criticism of President Bush's military record: "This is the anger that's killing my party." Also on Hannity & Colmes, Cadell said of Democrats questioning Bush's military service: "It just makes them [Democrats] whine." During the January 22, 2004, edition of MSNBC's Scarborough Country, Caddell also accused Kerry of being in the pocket of special-interest groups and called Kerry "a guy up there [with] just basically the crudest cynicism of all, saying, 'I can just reinvent myself and the press will go along with it, because they think it's kind of neat.' "
During the segment, syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak claimed that "Senator Clinton has trouble with female voters" based on his conversations with "a lot of conservatives" and "Democratic women." Novak did not point to any polling to back up this assertion.
From the February 23 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:
HANNITY: Anyway, joining us now is syndicated columnist, Fox News contributor Robert Novak, and Fox -- and former Democratic pollster, Fox News contributor Pat Caddell.
[...]
HANNITY: Let me ask you the Dick Morris demographic question, because Dick Morris contends that women that have never voted before will come to the table.
NOVAK: I think that's non -- I think that's nonsense. I think -- I think the -- I think --
CADDELL: It may or may not be. Let me say this. Can I say something, Bob, on this point? Just this -- you cannot run a campaign the way they're doing, saying, "Vote for me because I'm a woman," which is what they're doing.
If Barack Obama was out there saying, "Vote for me because I'm black," or Richardson -- Bill Richardson said, "Vote for me because I'm a Hispanic," people would hang them high. I mean, this is ridiculous.
HANNITY: Bob, your thoughts on the demographic issue?
NOVAK: I think that's a lot of nonsense. I really do believe that Senator Clinton has trouble with female voters. There are a lot of conservatives --
CADDELL: Older ones, particularly.
NOVAK: -- there are older ones, and there are Democrats I've talked to, Pat, Democratic women who say that they really don't want her to run. I think -- I think she has a lot of problems.
is Colmes drugged during these shows? Does he even pay attention? And including the traitor No-Facts just drags this low-IQ show even father down.
If FNC said, "here is $2million a year, dont put up a great fight just be a little challenging so we dont offend our repub audience. all this costs you is your pride ubt you get a job and your own radio show where you can do whatever you want."
i am pretty sure this is the deal, most people will do anything for $2million
So you are admitting that FNC institutionalizes lying and has only partisan political reasons in all it's shows? yep, gotta agree with that.
of course i am. it's too obvious to deny.
This is so right on target. These guys are nothing but media whores.
Hey, I'd do it. I'd get up on Fox as a pundit and assert from the Dem side that Hillary Clinton hasn't sacrificed newborns to Mammon in over two decades, so it's not anything to consider during the Presidential election, and I'd enjoy that big fat paycheck.
Candidates can seek votes any way they wish, however it's up to the voters to see through such pandering and judge them on issues and qualifications - not race, ethnicity, gender or any other irrelevant feature.
True...but the point is that this *man* is using scare tactics laced with historical atrosities (hang 'em high...as in lynching) to set up some sort of strawman position to get people to preemptively think about NOT voting for those two...in my opinion...
Wow, I never read near that much anti-political correctness stuff in what he said. Amazing.
"...but the point is that this *man* is using scare tactics laced with historical atrosities (hang 'em high...as in lynching) to set up some sort of strawman position to get people to preemptively think about NOT voting for those two"
Why would a partisan Democrat like Cadell not want either Clinton or Obama to win? And why is Media Matters smearing one of their own? Simply because he doesn't toe the far left line 100% of the time? Ever heard of being intellectually honest?
Rinoplasty...there is NO smear...just reporting what people are saying...
I don't think you know what "intellectual honesty" means. If one were to defend Caddell's tactics and suspect use of the phrase "hang them high" simply because he labels himself a Democrat, then THAT would be intellectually dishonest of someone who would attack a Republic for saying the same thing. The fact that MMFA and liberal posters are taking Caddell to task for his obnoxious (at best) comments is the very definition of intellectual honesty.
My point is that Caddell was being intellectually honest for criticizing Clinton. He isn't like those on the far left who only bash Republicans. He's an intellectually honest Democrat who criticizes both sides.
Curious standard for the self-proclaimed hunter of RINOs. RINOs = bad, DINOs = "intellectually honest"?
I suppose he's also being intellectually honest by letting slip with a lynching reference in a discussion on Obama?
"I suppose he's also being intellectually honest by letting slip with a lynching reference in a discussion on Obama?"
LOL!
The practice of hanging has existed for over two thousand years. Moreover, references to hanging have been present in various figures of speech (in every language) since its inception as a method of execution.
But wait! Obama's father is from Kenya, and Kenya is part of a continent that once provided the country Obama now lives in (and where this discussion took place) with slaves! GASP! Don't you know that some of these slaves (or people of similar ethnicity!) were ALSO hanged?
It's clear that all references to the practice of hanging (literal OR figurative!) should be patronizingly (but sensitively!) excised from one's speech! Only when a person with one or more parents from a continent that the US once acquired slaves from is concerned, of course. Anything else would surely be an overreaction!
Again, LOL.
Gee, let me guess...you're white? So of course you have absolutely no idea how a person of color feels when ignorant whites use words and expressions that evoke the historical oppression of their race. A reference to hanging a black man carries an historical weight regardless of whether or not that evocation was intended by the speaker. It's hardly patronizing to refrain from calling up the image of a hanging black man in the minds of your audience. And if you find that laughable then you're just as ignorant as Caddell. But the next time you're in a conversation with a black person (although I'm pretty sure that's a rare occurrence) feel free to make all the hanging references you want, and throw in some jokes about whipping and shackles for good measure. After all, those things have existed for thousands of years too, so why would a black person take offense? Silly oversensitive blacks.
First of all, how dare you challenge me? Secondly, yes, I AM black. LOL, just kidding, although if I was your opening gambit would have failed and you would have instantly become the loser in this pointless-but-thrilling (because I am involved, whooo!) internet argument/obvious display of misunderstanding on your part. Instead, you will now simply have lost by approximately THIS POINT (there!) instead. Afterwards, I shall return to doing whatever that "Zodak" character with the black eyes did in the original "He-Man" show. Remember that guy? Not only can you not make a reference to it, you can't even make a figurative statement which indirectly employs THE SAME NOUN to refer to THE ABSTRACT CONCEPT OF "HANGING" AS A MEANS OF EXECUTION, not a specific time or place! To clarify further, Pat "Muppet" (hmm..."Muppat"?) Cadell wasn't making "a reference to hanging a black man" at all. He used a phrase which happened to have the word "hang" in it. That's all. Hang! It could be the name of a Mortal Kombat villain, OR just a reference to a practice of execution used for thousands of years! Please remember to note that your explanation requires us to actually insert the phrase "black man" into Cadell's quote where it wasn't there originally. LOL! Even David Brock (who is pure and good in every fashion, like the Golden Child!) could be made to look VERY SLIGHTLY racist if we applied that method. I said slightly, Dave! Yes, master. But wait, you're also saying that I can't make any jokes about "whipping" and "shackles" around any black people, ever, and seem to be implying (in a somewhat racist-seeming way, I might add) that I would be in for some sort of Dolemite-meets-Ghetto Brawls II-style beatdown if I did. LOL! Don't worry, dude - it's all in the delivery! Usually we all laugh and hi-5 afterwards, sort of like what happened at the end of "Captain Planet" episodes. Who didn't want to show some solidarity to the russian chick, by the way? She was the wind one. LOL! Too easy. So, to get back to what you were saying, I can't even mention the concept of "hanging" as culturally and temporally nonspecific method of execution around "black people"? What about the word "hanging" in other contexts? Can I "hang 10" around "black people," or is it only bad to vocalize my actions? Can I suggest the word "hanging" in any sense, including through dance, or is that also going to land me 70s karate asskicking as well? Help me out here! You are patronizing and racist for assuming that black people NEED and DESIRE this sort of ridiculous self-censorship in an age when slavery is a ridiculous non-issue which absolutely nobody cares about until they want to accuse someone else of saying something racist. And yes, my comments obviously had to come from a WHITE person, with IGNORANT, WHITE VIEWS that can be directly attributed to THE WHITENESS of my WHITE WORLD and social circle. God, I love being WHITE! There are so many advantages and I'm consumed by a natural disdain for other races! So yes, OBVIOUSLY I could NEVER understand how a black person feels! LOL. Do you read back through this stuff before you post it? Did your post come through some sort of TIME WARP from a well-intentioned 60s protest march? I'm not trying to be insulting, I am seriously asking whether or not that is the case. Maybe I don't "feel" what this abstract group of homogenized "black people" are "feeling" - sorry, is that starting to sound too authentic? LOL, maybe I don't "understand," then. What I DO understand is that you've apparently made a commitment to parsing every statement every individual makes in order to find something offensive ON SOMEONE ELSE'S BEHALF, and will enthusiastically uphold said purpose even in the face of evidence otherwise.
Not that I'm complaining, of course. What you said was just wrong, that's all. Yeah, it's cool. No worries. Aight man. Yeah, cool. Aight. Yeah. Cool. Yeah. Yeah, that's cuz she crazy. Ha ha. Yeah. Aight then. Yeah. Peace!!
Uh, yeah...nevermind. It looks like in your world--which apparently consists of Nick-at-Night, excessive amounts of RockStar Cola and far too much spare time--issues of race amount to which tired Dolemite joke to haul out in front of your buddies for big laffs. Stay stoopid. And stay in your basement, because yes, out in the real world you will eventually feel the floor after "aight" comes out of your mouth one too many times.
First of all, I believe "RockStar" is an energy drink and not traditionally referred to as "cola." I don't mean to be rude, but it's obvious that you haven't even done the most basic research before shooting your mouth off about serious issues again. Really, I would advise restraint in the future.
Secondly, you have (yet again) confused words/concepts like "reference," "joke," "meaning," and "truth." I would NEVER make a "tired joke" about Dolemite, I simply referenced it for the sake of providing a clear and precise historical/sociological context with which to frame the overall point it was part of. If this wasn't readily apparent to you then I apologize, but I can and should hardly be blamed for your failings in this case; sorry.
Lastly, you essentially admit that your original assertion was entirely bogus and abandon it as quickly as possible in favor of further race-baiting comments. In what world do you think I would be the victim of race-based assault for using the hip slang phrase "aight"? Are you suggesting that using it "too many" times somehow constitutes an instance of visible (and violently actionable) racial prejudice?
LOL.
Anyway, what makes you think these imaginary racial avengers you've created could beat me up? Did you give them super powers? I sure hope so, because it wouldn't really be sporting of me to destroy them otherwise. If you'd like to give me directions to the SECRET BASE/HALL OF JUSTICE that you guys hang out in I would be more than happy to come over and show you what THESE guns can do! Believe me, you don't want to face my dragon punch. I'm trying to be cool about this. Aight?
Oops.
And Chad must've been a black man because those damned racists in Florida kept talking about hanging Chad...
No slaves came from Kenya to the New World. 75% were West African, 25% from the Angola region.
I said "continent" twice, but I appreciate the heads-up on spurious/nonexistent errors all the same! Thanks mang! ;) <-- We need more faces here! Dave, more faces!
Hey Hollowpoint, what happened to "Clams" Casino? Must be hidin' under the sand after that whoopin' you gave him. I haven't seen a dress down like that in a long time. That was classic!
I am sure all of the guys back at the comic book shop will be really impressed.
If pro-corporate Clinton or Obama are far-left, I'm the Queen of Southern Namibia. Conservatives wouldn't know a real leftist even if they got trapped in the Green Party convention. Most Democrats are CONSERVATIVES.
I just now heard on the radio that Al Sharpton, through some DNA link, thinks he may be related to Strom Thurmond.If I heard right, it seems Stroms ancestors may have "owned" Als.
Anybody have the whole story, and how will this be used in their campaigns?
It might be an even bigger blow to Strom's campaign than his recent death.
don't ruin my fun, Rusty. I was hoping for some serious responses.
In that case, I think they would characterize the outcome of their presidential debate like this:
SHARPTON: I walked all over Mr. Thurmond.
THURMOND: I owned Mr. Sharpton.
That's more like it.
Huntington, I have the info
Ancestry.com did some digging and found records that placed Sharpton's Ancestors as slaves of Julia Thurmond. Julia's grandfather was Strom's great-great-grandfather.
http://www.silive.com/newsflash/metro/index.ssf?/base/news-24/117249924989170.xml&storylist=simetro
Caddell makes a good point. Despite MMFA's best efforts to smear him, he isn't a fox croney in the very least so their attacks are moot.
His point is valid because the American people are too smart to simply make a vote based on race. If a candidate did that it would be insulting to the people. "Hey! Vote for me...im MEXICAN!!!" It's offensive and the public WOULD "hang them high"
"smear"?
Did you see the link posted by MMFA? That's a pretty good summary of his endeavors. He's another faux-liberal on FOX... Besides, I think the term 'smear' is used a bit too loosely by the MMFA dissenters.
Col. , how is MMFA smearing Cadell? Could you provide more specifics or is this just a blanket statement because you are unable to have a serious discussion?
they are trying to smear him by posting what he said as if it were something outrageous, false. as if mmfa can prove what he said doesn't have merit. it is his OPINION and we can only find out if it rings true or not if a candidate tries to get elected by using his race.
This is a website for conservative misinformation and seeing as how cadell isn't a conservative and this wasn't information, it therefore must be a smear or something nonPC that mmfa doesn't want to hear.
"they are trying to smear him by posting what he said as if it were something outrageous, false."
I disagree.I think they are posting it because these kinds of conversations are almost exclusively held regarding Democratic Candidates. Hillary Clinton running? Oh, she's just trying to ride out the campaign on her gender because she has nothing better to run on. Elizabeth Dole running? What? She's just another qualified candidate. You're not being sexist by bringing up her femininity, are you, libs?
As with most things regarding perceived liberals and conservatives in the MSM, there is a staunchly held double-standard regarding how issues are addressed on either side.
You must be kidding. To point out that Caddell is a "faux" liberal is not a smear, it's an assertion of the obvious. Caddell is as much a Democrat as was David Duke. The label Hannity accorded his guest was a lie. What's new about that? His buddy Alan Colmes is simply a shill in this neo-con Punch and Judy show.
Does anyone take Novak seriously any more?
Probably CIA operatives who don't want to be outed.
THANK YOU.
njguy93@yahoo.com
To their credit, neither Obama nor Richardson seem to be running based on their "race". The media are already doing it for them. There's a sleazy San Diego columnist, Ruben Navarrette, who's salivating all over the possibility of Richardson being president because he's "Hispanic". It's pretty disgusting.
Can you post a link to what you are talking about so we can decide for ourselves? Thanks. I won't hold my breath.
Here you go, Open: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/op-ed/navarrette/20070124-9999-lz1e24navarr.html
I want to thank you. It is a very rare occasion when a conservative actually provides a link to attempt to backup what they say. I will give you credit for that.
I will grant you that it is definitely a puff piece, but it is not at all advocating voting for Richardson because he is hispanic as you suggest:
"OK, I'll ask the question: Is America ready for a Hispanic president? The governor thinks so. It's not that he believes anyone should vote for him just because he is Hispanic. He thinks people should vote for the most qualified person. And the way he sees it, that person happens to be Hispanic."
Richardson said on television that he won't “run as a Hispanic candidate” but as an American who is “proud to be Hispanic.” But is that even possible when so many Americans are at each other's throats over immigration, language and assimilation?"
I think you are engaging in mind reading when you say Navarette is 'salivating all over the possibility of Richardson being president because he's "Hispanic"'. I don't see any evidence of that in the words that were written.
How did I know you'd come back with a response like this, "Open Mind"? History, I guess. You obviously don't know anything about Ruben Navarrette. The man is a rabid ethnocentric racist. But you would know that if you read his columns. Oh, you haven't read his columns? Imagine that!!! But you're prepared to defend him just to be argumentative. Pretty sad. And NO, "Open Mind", I won't provide you with another link. Do your own homework on this racist. Or go back to sleep. Doesn't really matter much either way.
"You obviously don't know anything about Ruben Navarrette. The man is a rabid ethnocentric racist." --clsn_lx1315
Evidence? Links? Must be nice to make baseless arguments.
'"Open Mind", I won't provide you with another link. Do your own homework on this racist.' --clsn_lx1315
No. It is not my job to prove your point. You are obviously either too stupid, arrogant or lazy (or any combination thereof) to support your own argument here. I wonder how you ever expect to convince anyone of your positions without a shred of evidence. Stop wasting my time!
'How did I know you'd come back with a response like this, "Open Mind"? History, I guess.' --clsn_lx1315
What an odd thing to say. If you apparently knew your argument was obviously flawed and weak, then I would have to question why you even posted it in the first place? Doesn't say much for your argument's intellectual honesty.
If I am predictable, it is merely because your flaw was apparently obvious to you as well.
Pat Caddell is a "liberal" and/or a "liberal balance" in the same sense as Joe Klein and the "liberal Democrats" that come on the FOX NEWS CHANNEL to "balance out" the dishonest bullies like Hannity and O'Reilly. They spend more time attacking their own party and/or agreeing with the Republican point of view than actually standing up for the liberal or Democratic argument. Obviously, sometimes they might genuinely disagree, but when it is a pattern, something stinks.
THANK YOU.
njguy93@yahoo.com
Has anyone put together a list of these people?
so there's Pat Caddell, Susan Estrich, Terry McCaulliffe -- any other "Democrats" who make a living on right-wing TV attacking other Democrats?
Tammy Bruce, the funniest of the bunch.
Caddell says that Hillary or her campaign is saying "vote for me because I'm a woman." Funny, I haven't heard them say that. Good catch, MMFA.
That's what I was going to say. I haven't heard such drivel from the Clinton campaign to "vote for her because she's a woman." I think she's been talking about issues, and what her take is on them, and what she wants to do with them. Now, if you agree with her, vote for her. Don't do it just because she is a woman. There may be some who do that, but Clinton is not asking for that at all.
Yeah I agree Rusty, The only ones who seem to like to point out that Hillary is a woman are the opinion columists and some in the media.
Usually the conservative political "expert" placed on a panel, brings it up as a possible strategy for her to win. (as if she does not have any qualities that would get her elected, except being a woman.)
It sure seems like FOX and the right wing pundit-bloviators are going out of their way to remind their audiences that Hillary is a woman, Barack is black and Mr. Richardson is of hispanic descent.
I like to think it's irrelevant for those of us on the left.
If I'm wrong, let me know...
And those of you on the right who say gender and ethnicity don't make a difference - Explain why your side of the media seems to be accentuating such?
I think pointing out the obvious is a bit silly in and of itself. My guess is the right points out that they think the left is infatuated with two candidates, one because of his skin color, the other because of her gender. After all, Obama does not have a record that shows his leadership in national politics and Clinton seems to be the favorite only because she's married to Bill.
I think conservatives don't really care about skin color or gender. The pundits are having fun noticing that it looks like the Democrats are.
(feel free to disagree!)
What have the democrats said and done to indicate such?
Have democrats/leftists/liberals called Barack Obama a "halfrican" or "half-minority"? (assorted right-wing pundit/bloviators have)
Let's not forget also the bogus Obama-madrassa story fronted by the Moonie Times (conservative newspaper) and FOX News (right-wing propaganda news channel)...
I thought I answered the question before. The fact that Obama and Clinton are currently the two front runners, illustrates the point that those on the right think those on the left are enfatuated by race and gender in picking their candidates.
Feel free to disagree. But what has Obama done that shows he'd be a good President? What has Hillary done? (Oh by the way, the same question should be asked of the Republican candidates.) If Clinton were not married to Bill would she have waltzed into NY and gotten elected? Would she be the frontrunner if she were not married to Bill? I doubt it. There are 50 or so other Democratic Senators, why does a Freshman Senator from Illinois with little experience on the national stage stand out and immediately become a force to be reckoned with? Hmmm???
No doubt about it the conservative pundits have used those terms like "halfrican". I hardly listen tot hem so I may be wrong, but beyond the initial flurry, I haven't seen where these terms are still being used. Having said that, I don't see it as any different than many on the left who have used derogotory terms for Bush and Cheney (and conservatives in general). It seems to me it goes with the territory.
As for the madrassa story, no doubt it was reported and denied by Obama and the mainstream press. It had a very short half-life. But that doesn't prove anything. One can also cite all day long false stories spread by the leftist media. The first one that comes to mind is Rathergate. I think ol' Dan is still sticking to it isn't he?
So I think we can agree that it happens on both sides.
Hope that helped. It is just my opinion. Feel free to disagree.
Obama is no less qualified than George W. Bush was when he was elected, so it's silly for the Right to keep pointing out Obama's track record.
It would be amusing to compare W's "accomplishments" prior to running for the presidency with those of Obama. W's background include a series of failed business ventures and a less than stellar governorship of Texas where his much vaunted "No child left behind" program turned out to be a major league untruth. Clearly, Obama lacks such important business experience in his CV. Should we compare W's legacy C at Yale to Obama's grades at Harvard? If having a father occupy the White House gave the son special insights into the ways of the world, such insights have yet to become manifest.
"The fact that Obama and Clinton are currently the two front runners, illustrates the point that those on the right think those on the left are enfatuated by race and gender in picking their candidates."
That's odd.
To me, the fact that Obama is in the lead is a sign of a strong desire among the left-of-right for a person who has a commanding presence, a strong intellect, and a backbone to take the lead in DNC politics. The fact that Clinton is in the lead is a sign that even the Democrats can fall victim to the family succession of American politics - it's not just limited to the Republicans and their infatuation with the Bush regime.
For the Right to immediately point out sex and color is, to me, a sign of what they are and always have been obsessed with.
The nickname real liberals have given Obama is "Senator Slither"...because he is a master of meaningless platitudes.
The pundits are having fun noticing that it looks like the Democrats are.
But they can't actually point to any examples of Democrats saying "vote for Hillary because she's a woman."
No wonder it's so "fun" - it's fantasy.
Right. All we have to remember is that they are establishment corporofascists intent on maintaining the status quo.
- Novak did not point to any polling to back up this assertion. - mmfa
So...Novak's comment isn't credible because he doesn't cite any polling data.
Jack Kelly cites polling data and mmfa dismisses the poll.
Here's news for the minions at mmfa...this country is not run by polls.
Arguments are usually based on something.
1. Sometimes arguments are based on information that is completely factual and cannot be argued against by either side.
2. Sometimes arguments are based on apparently weak information such as poorly worded polls.
3. The worst arguments are completely baseless like Novak's comments about Hillary's strength with women voters.
Your argument seems to present a false dichotomy. Both Novak and Caddell could have sited better data. Had that happened, it would have been much more difficult for MMFA to cite those problems. Claiming these guys can't win with MMFA -- no matter what they do is simply a dishonest argument.
"Partisan Democrat like Caddell . . ." - Croc Hunter
"Despite mmfa's best efforts to smear him . . ." - Pvt. Roy Campbell
LOL . . . Caddell has worked on two democratic presidential campaigns: McGovern's in '72 and Carter's in '76 . . . since then, he's worked primarily in Hollywood . . . and hasn't formally aligned himself with the Democratic party in years . . .
Yet, he's a "partisan Democrat." Riiiiiiiiight . . . the kind of "partisan Democrat" Faux sNooze loves: the kind who always has unkind things to say about Democrats - which is why he's on the show {to give "balance."}
Just as Dick "toe-sucker" Morris bashes the Clintons at every opportunity - yet that doesn't stop Faux from refering to him in their chyrons as "Dick Morris/ Former Clinton Strategist" . . .
It would be funny if it weren't so pathetic: since "black Tuesday" {aka Nov. 7th, 2006} the Faux Noise Channel, despite their tagline of "fair and balanced," doesn't even TRY to hide their bias anymore . . . its a free-for-all of smear, smear, smear, any and all democrats, but HRC and Obama in particular . . . anyone who dares to question this glorious war and any Dem who wishes to inherit George's throne is considered evil in the eyes of Faux and their kool-aid drinking minions . . .
"I think conservatives don't really care about skin color or gender. The pundits are having fun noticing that it looks like the Democrats are." - AnotherAmeriKKKan
Was it a Democrat that called Obama a "halfrican?" Nope . . . that was Melanie Morgan and Rush Limpballs . . .
Was it a Democrat that said Obama was "colorless . . . almost a white guy?" Nope . . . that was Glenn Blech.
Was it a Democrat who referred to HRC as "Satan?" Nope . . . that was Don Anus, er Imus.
"Here's news for the minions at mmfa . . . this country is not run by polls." - Wesley
Correct . . . it is run by VOTES. And the majority of those cast this past Nov. 7th indicate the republic is tired of this war and the president who started it . . . which is eerily similar to polls saying a majority of this country is against the war and have a low opinion of the president who started it . . .
Could those two facts possibly be related?
NAAAAHHH couldn't be . . .
CADDELL is a "Democratic" Pollster like Dick Morris is a "Democratic" consultant.
They keep the "Democratic" connection in their lead credentials for only ONE reason: To make it appear FOX is being "fair and balanced".
So, "fair and balanced" consists of one Hard Rightwinger as moderator, one hard Rightwinger as guest, another guest who "claims' to be Democratic, and another moderator who has been obviously castrated by the Rightwing ownership of the show.
"Fair and Balanced", to FOX, consists of three hard rightwing shills and one ineffectual liberal hired-hand milquetoast.
To be fair to FOX, it MUST be this way. If there were really fair treatment of Liberals/Progressives on their shows, the rightwing cause would be lost. The Right cannot debate, and cannot afford to meet Liberals on an even battlefield of ideas. They KNOW this, and so they have to stack the deck resoundingly in their favor. This is what cowards do, and none of us should be surprised.