Do the voters really understand what's at stake?

It seems to me that the Democrats have set the agenda this election and the Republicans are following that lead. They are talking about healthcare, global warming, change, moving forward, etc. I'm not sure the average voters ever really research the issues that really touch them on a daily basis. I'm also not convinced that voters really understand where any of these candidates stand. How can they when all they hear is scripted sound-bites from the candidates AND the media backing them? How can the media truly say what they mean, when they have to turn around and apologize for it?

Instead of talking about the issues the media can't get away from the useless bickering between Clinton and Obama and gender and race. The possibility of rise of a Harvard-educated Illinois senator with a Kenyan father, America's first realistic black candidate has many around the world and in the US all a-twitter, suggesting that he will present a fresh image of the United States around the world. What does that mean anyway? I know, they want the world to LOVE us, they want the US to change and fit in with the wishy-washy-ways of groups like the United Nations. No Thank You.

The truth is the race for president is still wide open, even though some candidates have already declared they are winners.

I think it's a shame how the media is directing the discussion and attention to and from certain candidates. The founding fathers never meant for the Town Crier to choose the president of the free world, yet that is exactly what the media is trying to do.

On the Republican side I want a CONSERVATIVE. Romney was elected in one of the most Liberal states in the US. He brags about that, but is that really a good thing? The fact that he appealed to liberals is a negative as far as I'm concerned. McCain is a Democrat in Republican clothing. Huckabee is changing his tune faster than the Road Runner in a cartoon changes ACME supplies. Rudy, well he seems to have dropped off the radar with his Florida only campaign. And then there's Fred Thompson, who I know has lots of followers across the US, but may never get the chance to go forward. The media already has Fred gone.

The National Ledger says, "Thompson is the only Republican candidate who can bring all Republicans into the voting booth in November, yet too many Republicans choose to ignore this reality."

Thompson didn’t enter the race late. The other eight eager beavers entered the race a year early, throwing the nomination process into a confusing tailspin and the nation into unwanted perpetual campaign mode. Those who claim Thompson’s late entry cost him the nomination need to answer why the early “front-runner” Rudy Giuliani, is in worse shape than Thompson in the polls?

No conservative including Thompson, had any chance of winning in Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan or Nevada, all heavily liberal, which delivered three different winners in four primaries. So Thompson bet his farm on South Carolina, where conservative candidates normally do best. (continue reading)

There's rumor that Fred Thompson's elderly mother is ill, that he has returned to Tennessee to be with her, and that an "announcement" from Fred will be made tomorrow, Tuesday. Rumor has it he will drop out, but there have been rumors like this since he first started campaigning. I hope these rumors are wrong.

Here's Eight Questions Reporters Should Ask Clinton - And not a single one about race!, By Todd Gitlin at Columbia Journalism Review:

1. Richard Holbrooke, one of your chief foreign policy supporters, wrote in 2005 that the “Global War on Terror” “is not an accurate description of America’s enemy or of what we are engaged in.” But you use the term “war on terror.” Why?

2. Do you propose to preserve American bases in Iraq?

3. Are you prepared to renounce the Bush Doctrine, which permits preventive war? If the answer is “yes,” how do you square that with your vote to brand Iran’s Revolutionary Guards a “terrorist organization,” and your refusal to take military action against Iran “off the table”?

4. In 1999, your husband withdrew the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty from Senate consideration in the belief that the Senate would not vote to ratify it by the necessary two-thirds vote. Do you anticipate being able to work with the Senate to pass such a treaty, or indeed any arms control treaty? How would you persuade dissenters?

5. Which of the Bush administration’s privacy-invading and government secrecy measures do you reject?

6. To what extent should the money saved by phasing out American combat operations in Iraq be used to reduce the deficit, and to what extent should it be used for creating jobs, environmentally sensible investments, and social programs?

7. One of your chief economic advisers, Gene Sperling, has written that “there are goals—banning child labor in our factories; preventing racial, religious, and gender discrimination in the workforce—that require direct intervention in the market regardless of their efficiency or economic impact.” Is government support for the organizing of unions among the “direct interventions” you favor?

8. Do you believe that the protection of drug company patents is a responsibility of the federal government?

Image from Sam Adams at Conservablogs

Transparency of government, what a fantasy. Prepare to hear cries of voter fraud because:

This year for the first time Democrats may cast their primary ballots on the Internet. Democrats Abroad an official branch of the Democratic National Committee, representing overseas voters, will hold its first global presidential preference primary from February 5-12 by Internet and Fax. Their votes will be represented at the Democratic National Convention that will be held August 25-28 at the Pepsi Center in Denver, Colorado. (AP, via Cristi Li)

Ah, politics !
__________________________________________________________________-
Trackposted to Mark My Words, Rosemary's Thoughts, Nuke Gingrich, third world county, Faultline USA, Allie is Wired, DragonLady's World, Pirate's Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Celebrity Smack, Big Dog's Weblog, CORSARI D'ITALIA, and Dumb Ox Daily News, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Comments

[Debbie]

Thanks everybody. Yes, the media is the one that really does not understand. It's a shame.

Glad to be home and back to regular activities.

[Skunkfeathers]

The media is still obsessed with "shaping" election results, instead of "we report..you decide".

So, the world gets smeared on Dec 21, 2012? That creates a dilemma: if they're right, I don't want to waste the money on Christmas gifts that year; then again, if they're wrong, I'd rather face they're being right, than the mall (maul) on December 24.

Granted, that particular dilemma is non sequitur if the prophetic pundits prove right, but it's easier to ponder than the current presidential race ;-)

[Rastaman]

Welcome home,and good post!

Mitt Romney is a flip-flopper. He's the type of politician who obeys the highest bidder, my opinion anyway. Thompson and Giuliani may both be goners but they're not gone yet. I had Giuliani pegged as the sure winner, the most popular guy, and here I see Romney, and McCain who I respect as a veteran but don't want as my president, leading the pack so far.

As for the democrats, I was overjoyed to see Obama lose to Hillary in Nevada. Obama scares the crap out of me and I hope he keeps on losing even if that means that Hillary will be the democratic challenger. Better her than him.

It's amazing when, put to the test, yes we will choose to have our left arm cut off instead of our right. Some poisons are less fatal than others.

Have you been watching the History Channel lately? Instead of history, it's been all about prophecy for the past two nights, and the prophets all agree that Dec. 21, 2012 is when our planet gets somehow smeared. REALLY wierd show. That would be at the end of this next term. Real woo woo stuff. I plan on some posts on it, it goes off in all directions.

Rasta

[ortho]

Debbie writes,
The possibility of rise of a Harvard-educated Illinois senator with a Kenyan father, America's first realistic black candidate has many around the world and in the US all a-twitter, suggesting that he will present a fresh image of the United States around the world. What does that mean anyway?

This means people around will the world will associate U.S. oppression with a black man, instead of the usual, stereotypical white-male patriarch.

Debbie, I'm glad you and Hubby are out of the hospital. I'm sure it feels good to be home.

[Yidwithlid]

I think that most Americans Get it...I think much of the media doesn't