My dad told me just the other day that my grandmother voted for Kennedy because he was better looking.

Anyhow, for me this is not about liberal media.
I see a bias when only talking about the Dems.

These generalities are never good because there are always plenty of exceptions. I use 'media' for sake of ease, what I mean is a decent chunk of the media. Mostly I'm talking about certain blogs, websites and most specifically MSNBC and CNN.

Studies should be taken for what they are worth (up to each individual) but there have been at least two studies that have shown that Obama gets a lot more favorable coverage than Clinton. They also show both Dems get favorable coverage more often than any Reps, so I'm sure this will not get much credibility around here. As far as comparing similar ideaologies, what exactly would be the natural bias? Pro-Clinton? Hardly. There isn't much of anything Pro-Clinton anywhere these days but in a voting booth.

I just want to make clear, because I'm pro-Clinton, that I don't think any of this is in any way the fault of Obama and perhaps because I'm sympathetic to her, things seem to magnify themselves. I'd still argue of a pro-Obama bias, even in light of this.

I haven't seen the commerical you're talking about, but I do know that in the op-ed piece that Caroline wrote she really talked Obama up and compared him to her father. Obama, I'm sure, could ask her to tone down the comparisons, but in the cutthroat culture of politics that our country has fostered it's almost impossible to win without this often unwarranted high praise. I blame us as voters moreso that I would any candidate for that.

Not really - I've seen attempts to marginalize him as the "black candidate" and debates where he gets tougher questions than say, Hillary.

Well the Kennedys are from MA and Senator Clinton won MA, so it didn't work in MA. It's not just the Kennedy thing. I like the man VERY much but it's easy to get swept away by the idea of a person vs the reality. I've done it often enough myself to know, not about politicians but it is a similar concept.

You hit the nail on the head. Unfortunately, I think that's the case for a large number of American voters. Most people are just too wrapped up in their cute suburban lives to pay attention to the real issues in this country and find out where the candidates stand on them. Then, when it comes to vote they pick the person they like the best as though they're voting for "Most Popular" back in 12th grade. It's not a wonder real change is difficult to effect in our country.

his own personal safety.

How so?

I saw elsewhere on the 'net people expressing concerns that Obama would be likely to be assassinated.

Maybe I'm too naive and rosy-eyed, but I don't see it as that big of a concern.

I actually have had that thought cross my mind too, but I'm hoping we have much better security for our presidents now than we did at that time. I think the Kennedy assassanation really woke the country and the government up to the fact that our leaders are far from invincible.

When people start bringing up RFK, I get this uneasy feeling too.

there's a reason why Colin Powell's wife was against him running for higher office.

My parents and I are the same way. I don't think the country could handle another devastating loss like that.

Though, Secret Service for Presidential candidates started the day after RFK was killed. :sigh:

Go Obama :rockon:

You learn something new every day.:ohmy: I thought Secret Service for candidates was still a relatively new practice. It's sad that it took that for it to happen.:sad: I still wonder about how much better off our country would probably be if the Kennedys hadn't been assassinated.

A friend who enthusiastically voted for Obama on Tuesday told me that when she was watching the returns that night and Obama gave his speech, she was very disturbed by the appearance of an all-black choir behind him. It wasn't actually an all-black choir of course, but it looked like one (I had noticed the same thing). We both found it really off-putting. Obama should deflect that as much as possible.

Why did you find it offputting? And deflect what?

I don't think I understand what you're saying there.

The sort of religious-like fervor surrounding him. He can't help how people respond to him but he doesn't have to encourage it by appearing to be a preacher in front of a choir. I'm basically saying, I agree with a lot of the article that Max posted.

I watched that speech and it never occurred to me that there was a quasi-choir behind him. I'd be willing to bet that 95% of people didn't either. :shrug:

my father was in Chicago on Tuesday night, and he had this to say (please forgive his "U-2"):



[q]Being in Chicago last evening was most interesting. Obama's headquarters are located one floor above us in an office building on Michigan Ave. I stayed at the Hyatt Regency, just across the street, and the grand ballroom became the site for his post ballot counting speech. we had dinner and then stopped by the ballroom, but learned he was not going to speak for at least an hour or more (depended on Hilary - he wanted her to go first)). I went back about 10:30 PM and went to the "celebration'. Of note, you did not need a ticket, promise to pledge $$, or be staff or member of the press to attend - just come in ( but $2 to check your coat), and pass through not too rigorous a security check . The crowd on the stage seemed like a well orchestrated diverse group - but no more diverse than the rest of the audience, some standing for 2 or more hours to hear him speak - young and old African Americans, Hispanics, some Asians, young and old caucasian men and women,college students and young volunteers. Jessie Jackson walked by, as did Cornell West. A few other observations :


* when Hilary was giving her speech on CNN, at first they put her on mute. And when the volume returned,there were multiple cheers/jeers of 'no you can't.. no you can't"
* one supporter standing behind me commented - "they will never make a song from one of her speeches - flat and drab"
* Obama was introduced by Dick Durbin, senior sneator from Illinois - while wating for Obama, the music was " beautiful day " by U-2
* Obama began by first acknowledging the death of several people in Tenn and GA from the tornados..then moved to his basic speech about change
* a few lines I remember in particular : " we/you are who we have been waiting for all these years to create change" . " what began as a whisper one year ago on the steps of the Illinois state house is now a chorus heard round the nation" " the more experience one has in Washington the greater the chance you cannot create change", and to think, his speech writer is only 26...........
* he ended with a story about his early days working in the south end of Chicago, and that for his first community meeting, no one showed up...... his staff was crushed, but he was able to keep his volunteers and staff working and finally they made progress in basic issues such as food, housing, education and alternatives to life on the street........

I left thinking he might just be too good to be true......should be an interesting next month or two............and security needs to be better........

[/q]

Gotcha. Thanks for clarifying.

Maybe. My friend's an atheist, and I'm non-religious. We noticed it immediately. I was put off by it the same way I'm put off by Bush's Biblical references in speeches. I'm NOT comparing Obama to Bush in any way, but some people just really don't want religious symbolism mixed with politics, and are sensitive to it. :shrug: