• Als Spam markieren
• Beitrag melden

• 
  Diese Gruppe Alles

• Archiv
• RSS-Feeds

• Kontakt
• Hilfe
• Impressum
• Datenschutz

Liberal media say Palin is vague but what about Obama? Obama isn't only vague but evasive.

Liberal media are belittling Palin for being vague in her interviews
and debate, but why didn't they bring up this issue with Obama? What
can be more vague than 'Change', 'Yes We Can' (do what?), or 'Hope'--
or 'the audacity of hope'? What is so audacious about
procrastination?  Real audacity is about taking action based on strong
action.

But, the liberal media tag Palin with vagueness while Obama's much
greater vagueness has been elevated by the liberal media as sacred
wisdom. It's really nothing but New Age politics, a blend of Hollywood
Kitsch, MTV, socialist agit-prop, and flaky spiritualism.

Worse, Obama isn't only vague but downright evasive about his real
past.  He doesn't want us to know about what he really did as a young
man and as a career mandarin politician. He doesn't want us to know
about his ties to radical preachers and intellectuals. He doesn't want
us to pry into his dealings with Tony Rezko and other such crooks. He
just wants us to see his image as projected on the silver screen--or
tv screen as the case may be--with the aid of the liberal media.

But, the liberal media treat Obama and Palin differently.  Palin is
dismissed for being vague--when she actually isn't--while Obama's
vagueness is treated as vogueness.

Antworten