Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Town Hall Debate: Straight Out of a Sitcom

It's my fault. I should have turned my back to the TV screen and just listened to the debate. Instead, my eyes were glued to the tube for every second. Oh yes, in addition to taking it in visually, I tried to listen attentively as John McCain and Barack Obama went back and forth, making their points regardless of the question asked.

But that wasn't what took me off course. It was the visuals.

The sight of John McCain moving around the set did it for me. I can't help it: His on-screen performance made me think of the '70s sitcom "Sanford and Son," specifically the grumpy, patronizing and sarcastic Fred Sanford, played by the comedian Redd Foxx.

McCain was the incarnation of Fred Sanford.

McCain's movements, his awkward stiff-legged strutting toward and away from the audience, called to mind ol' Fred when he was spouting off some of his insults and barbs directed at his son and at his top nemesis, sister-in-law "Aunt Esther."

Obama didn't help matters either.

He assumed the posture of Lamont, Sanford's twenty-something son. Lamont -- cooler, more level headed, certainly less condescending -- differed with his father on just about everything. Yet was superficially polite.

Nonetheless, Lamont's disdain always came across, especially as he portrayed his old man as out of touch with new realities, just as Obama did tonight.

I'm sure I'll feel differently when I read the transcript.

By Colbert King  | October 7, 2008; 11:21 PM ET
Categories:  King  | Tags:  Colbert King  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Town Hall Debate: Political Business as Usual
Next: The Town Hall Debate: In Praise of Complete Sentences

Comments

So I just saw a new poll come out....Dream tickets for the president. Huckabee/Palin comes out 5 to 1 over McCain/Palin. Perhaps the RNC should switch out McCain for Huckabee, they might have a better chance at the white house this year cause I just can't see Obama loosing at this point. The problem is news stations are already calling the race for Obama.....switch it up and have a chance, or should we all stay home and just let Obama take the white house?

see poll at http://www.mccanes.com/watchdebatevp.html

Funny Huckabee was just recently named Featured Debator of the year by WathcDebate.com, ironic that McCain would bomb so bad right after the runner up wins debater of the year. http://www.huckabeeshow.com

Posted by: pastor123 | October 7, 2008 11:47 PM | Report abuse

The most boring presidential debate this year. It seemed scripted, particularly some of those foreign-policy questions. They just didn't seem like the most likely questions ordinary people would have asked.

Lamont was a bit better-looking than Sen.Obama. Fred was a lot more entertaining than poor old John McCain. And I'd like to see Sarah Palin try to get "all mavericky" with Aunt Esther. That lady would have chewed her up and spit her out without so much as missing a glory hallelujah.

Best of all, the Sanford & Son episodes only lasted 30 minutes. . .

Posted by: martymar123 | October 7, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

Moving around while your opponent is speaking is a way of distracting the audience's attention. (A stage actor who fidgets while Hamlet is delivering a soliloquy gets fired pretty quick.) It's boorish--deliberate, calculated boorishness.

Posted by: Alexis3 | October 7, 2008 11:51 PM | Report abuse

From:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/10/that-one.html

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

"That One"

What a very odd thing for McCain to say.

McCain repeatedly invoked the need for a "steady hand on the tiller" tonight--for someone who will be calm and cool in the crises that the upcoming years will present us.

Yet this is a man who is utterly unable to contain his contempt--even on a night when, even as Bill Bennett says, he needed to "break through", and even when such a strange expression of disdain could only highlight pettiness, anger and partisanship that voters wish that candidates would steer away from in the greater interest of the nation.

McCain's fundamental position--one from which he finds his momentum and meaning--is so often one of a contemptuous anger for those who do not understand what he believes he has learned--e.g., "them".

This is the impulsive, gut-driven, black and white thinking that we have seen throughout the campaign.

We have had 8 years of a President driven by impulsive, black and white, gut-driven, categorical thinking. In those 8 years, from a position that manifested from the very start an angry, assumed knowledge, and a contempt for the position of others, we have now seen the results.

So this time: choose that one.

Cite:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/10/that-one.html

Posted by: robthewsoncamb | October 7, 2008 11:51 PM | Report abuse

I was thinking the same thing about McCain, he had his back to the camera, was wandering around a lot. When asked about who to nominate for treasury secretary, he tried to joke with Tom Brokow "not you", but it sounded like a put down not a friendly joke.
Obama staid put and played the message. McCain would make sudden moves in opposite directions, of course to engage other audience members, but it was awkward.
McCain was more clear this time and is begininng to figure out his narrative; Obama had his down months ago, it was shining in his response to the last "zen" questions about what he did not know; he would only admit to what he knows and he dissolved into the change theme.
McCain could try another hail mary pass: level with the public and tell them to prepare for pain and sacrifice.
The elderly woman who asked about what level of sacrifice was needed, neither rose to the emerging expectation that the public is ready to live within their means. McCain hinted at the deficit, but he should hit hard with it, and say its the next war to win, and tell Americans about short terms pain for long term gain.

Posted by: FrederickDuquette | October 8, 2008 12:08 AM | Report abuse

ANOTHER BIG WIN FOR OBAMA!

This one wasn't even close. I thought this "town hall" format was supposed to be McCain's strong point?

I guess the question heading into the final debate will be whether or not Obama/Biden can go undefeated through the debate season?

Once again, Obama looked more presidential.

McCain looked and sounded like an angry and tired old man.

Obama articulated his points clearly.

McCain rambled on from point to point and failed to answer the questions he was asked.

Obama gave specific answers to how he would help the middle class.

McCain did not say "middle class" once!

Posted by: jgarrisn | October 8, 2008 12:20 AM | Report abuse

McCain looked not only grumpy, he looked 100 yrs old up there next to Obama. His demeanor appeared cranky and his answers were all over the place. I thought the "that one" comment was the kicker! I'm voting for "that one"!! It's not surprising he didn't bring up his despicable stump comments he and Palin have spewed in the past 4 days. There's no way he could have been so venomous in person with the whole world watching. McCain/Palin have tried to incite a mob mentality with their highly charged erroneous terrorist attacks against Obama. It's turning off people in droves. They are desperate, in the last throes of their twisted campaign

Posted by: radio3142 | October 8, 2008 12:31 AM | Report abuse

I noticed McCain was wander around aimlessly when Obama was speaking. He looked like a lost demented old man who needed directions to get back home. If he gets elected I hope he is at least 4 years away from senility. Also he looked in worse physical condition than I expected.

Posted by: tinguman | October 8, 2008 12:38 AM | Report abuse

Thank you Colbert King, for the funniest political commentary of the campaign to date.

And don't forget that when McCain "goes off" in private (or when he's snapping in public at his make-up slathered second wife) McCain sounds like one of Redd Foxx's famously dirty party records.

Posted by: HughBriss | October 8, 2008 12:50 AM | Report abuse

McCain was just unreal.

"That one!".... Sheesh. That's gonna be a catchphrase for years. I forsee t-shirts with that written on it.

"Not you, Tom." For a moment, for a dreaded moment, I thought someone was going to say "Excuse me?" and just embarass everyone. It was just awful and I didn't want to see it. Looking back on it though it was hilarious because Brokaw paused for about 10 seconds before replying.

He's a cranky old bat and it's showing. The more time goes by, the more unreal the concept of a McCain Presidency is, especially with Caribou Barbie in the wings. It's so bad that sometimes I wish this was some sort of hallucination and that McCain wasn't half as bad.

The jury just got back. McCain's done.

Posted by: hijikatatoshizo | October 8, 2008 1:20 AM | Report abuse

I thought it all went south for McCain when he named Warren Buffet & directly identified Buffet as an Obama supporter...What more does anyone need to here when the republican candidate names the democratic nominees financial guru as his choice to save America....and then if the hole wasn't getting deeper he names the woman who made E-Bay-E-Bay (second)why not choose her over superficial cheerleader Palin for the VP slot....the guy seemed about 15 years behind the curve...

Posted by: cahpr | October 8, 2008 1:50 AM | Report abuse

I'm not sure Sanford and Son quite works for me as McCain and Obama. But it's funny, and it's sure as hell a more entertaining image than the *actual* debate.

I've never complained of a debate being "boring" before. Never. But wow, was this a snooze-fest.

Posted by: libelian | October 8, 2008 2:02 AM | Report abuse

I have to agree, cahpr, when McCain brought up Meg Whitman for Treasury Secretary I thought that had loud echoes of the Palin pick. I'm a pro-woman woman, but experience building e-Bay doesn't seem at all the resume that's called for right now. McCains choices of associates, advisors and surrogates haven't been all that great and the evidence is the sloppy and chaotic campaign he's run. NOT the guy we need running the country right now.

Posted by: noGOP4me | October 8, 2008 2:03 AM | Report abuse

Did you see McCain grab his chair in the background while Obama was speaking ?

The chair didn't break and that was the only difference with Amy Poehler / Hillary during Fey's first SNL stunt.

Posted by: stephanemot | October 8, 2008 4:00 AM | Report abuse

McCain looked like the Grumpy Old Man. I could just hear him screeching "get off my grass!!". I suspect all the moving around helps him diffuse his rage and prevents him from getting stiff while sitting waiting for his turn. Can you imagine how it would look if he had to struggle to go from sitting to standing with every question? At one point, I muted the television just to watch his body language. He looked feeble and stiff. There's just something about him that I find genuinely creepy. Maybe it's that disingenuous "my friends" that he repeats over and over.

Posted by: ggwalt123 | October 8, 2008 6:00 AM | Report abuse

radio3142 wrote: "I thought the "that one" comment was the kicker! I'm voting for "that one"!!" I could not agree with your comment more.
And every time McCain said, "We need a steady hand at the tiller, I shouted out, "So vote for Obama."

What a great campaign button or bumper sticker: "I'm Voting for 'That One'." Or "That One for President." I predict we'll be seeing those soon if they aren't already out there.

(Back to Sanford & Son: Here's a shout-out for the late Whitman Mayo, who played Grady Wilson. He may not have had as many lines as the principals, but when he was on the stage, you knew you'd be laughing.)

Posted by: martymar123 | October 8, 2008 7:33 AM | Report abuse

McCain is stiff because his shoulders don't work right because they were damage from being tortured. He cannot lift his arms.

This article is disgraceful.

Mr. King should be ashamed.

Posted by: jeffu1 | October 8, 2008 7:33 AM | Report abuse

Yes, visuals do matter. Remember the Vice Presidential debate? That, I do believe, affected my perception of Palin. As many others, I was surprised to see her hold her own. Recently, I listened to it on the radio, and wow! What a difference. The visuals don't cloud your thoughts. It's even clearer that she dodges questions and isn't coherent in her answers. Of course, while watching the debate, I knew all of this. But it was scary just listening to it.

Posted by: lisabees | October 8, 2008 7:41 AM | Report abuse

I don't watch the debates - I listen to them - I couldn't watch the Palin/Biden debate because everytime I see Palin, I just want to call in a snowball airstrike on her. But I was wondering some things during last night debates:
1. If McCain knows where Bin Laden is and how to get him, why hasn't he shared this information with Petraeus, his man of the hour? Why is he withholding information that could spare the lives of hundreds of American soldiers?
2. This $5000 health care rebate idea - McCain talks about employer-based health insurance. Okay fine. What about those folks who are employed, but in small business ventures that can't afford the cost of offering health insurance to their employees? What about the folks who are unemployed without health insurance? Why hasn't anyone questioned McCain about his advisor's remarks regarding the ER being the same as health insurance? Emergency Medicine is overstressed as it is - does the McCain camp seriously want to overburden an already burdened medical system this way, and what would be the benefits of this to both patients and medical staff? Also ER's don't do the preventative testing - so how would someone without health insurance pay for a mammogram, a lung capacity test, prostate testing. Likewise ER's don't do treatments such as chemo/radiation or Physical Therapy - so how would the uninsured or underinsured be able to obtain such treatments?
3. As for the ability to obtain insurance across state lines - how would McCain ensure that my doctor would be in the network accepted by an out of state insurance? How would McCain ensure that treatment deemed as necessary by my doctor would not be denied by any insurer? And what does the AMA really think of this plan? Shouldn't insurance reform be part of any health care reform? McCain has enjoyed the benefits of taxpayer-paid healthcare - shouldn't the taxpayer likewise enjoy that same level of care?

Posted by: cymric | October 8, 2008 7:41 AM | Report abuse

The problem with health insurance across state lines is, most of the meaningful regulations are at the state level. Those are the regulations which he disparages as mandates - mandate means you've gotta do it. Some gottas (like not hiring ten year olds, or forbidding companies from refusing to pay for cancer treatment) are good.

When you take away the state's ability to regulate, without adding in federal protections, what you have is a huge unregulated mess. I know commentators have criticized Obama for the comparison, but he's right - this WOULD be just like the banking industry deregulation, in that virtually all consumer protections would be stripped out.

What are these horrible mandates? Things like coverage for lymphedema (swelling after breast cancer surgery) - is that something you'd know to ask for in your insurance, until you needed it? But when you need it and don't have it, you'll care.

NO to McCain's horrible health care plan.

Breast Cancer Survivors for Obama 08!!

Posted by: VirginiaGal2 | October 8, 2008 8:10 AM | Report abuse

Great observation! I couldn't help but notice the same thing at one point in the debate when McCain was addressing a questioner and over the course of his answer had nearly moved off stage down one of the aisles. He was almost behind one of the bleachers... all I could think was "Oh geez... someone get grampa, he's wandering out of the yard again." Then, later in the debate, McCain kept wandering into the background shot whenever Obama was speaking. I know it is meant as a tactic to distract the audience, and it certainly distracted me, but only to emphasize that McCain looked confused and tired.

Posted by: hiberniantears | October 8, 2008 8:46 AM | Report abuse

Hey clobert..

you know why McCain is so "stiff" don't you?? He broke both arms and a leg when he ejected from his A4 Skyhawk over North Vietnam..plus it didn't do him any good that he spent 5 + years in a NVA POW camp.. being tortured on a daily basis ..

How about we string YOU up.. break some legs and some arms... and see how you move.. I'd get a good chuckle over that...

you are a totally dispicable hack....

hopeing to see the post on its way out of bidness...

Posted by: kglkgl06 | October 8, 2008 8:49 AM | Report abuse

To those of you who rushed in to say why McCain is stiff and defend his honor - yes, we are all well aware now that he was a POW.

That does not however; excuse rudness or prevarication. It does not excuse wondering around and looking lost. It does not excuse his lack of judgement (or maybe it does if he might have PTSD).

There are plenty of people in this world today who have lost legs and arms and parts of their bodies in wars. Yet, that does not explain a McCain who would not vote for a GI bill because some soldiers might want to go to college instead of re-enlisting.

He was a POW - just because he was, and because he served honorably in the military does not mean that he necessarily should automatically be exempt from acting as he did last night or qualify him to be President.

Posted by: gjkbear | October 8, 2008 9:37 AM | Report abuse

At first, I also considered whether it was distastful to jest about McCain's posture since he does have a "disfigurement" affliction (and old age). But then it occurred to me that McCain COULD HAVE constrained his movements so as to conceal those afflictions rather than flaunting them by strutting around in such an obviously animated way that EMPHASIZED those afflictions. And if you're going to flaunt yourself so conspicuously (vs. Obama's more respectful sitting still during McCain's answers), then you must bear the consequences of your actions.

Posted by: phil13 | October 8, 2008 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Are you a Republican frustrated with this elections cycle? If so, then you may need to take some ownership of the fact that you voted for George W. Bush, twice! Next time exercise better judgment and vote for competence instead of a best friend. Then maybe your party can hold on to power.

Posted by: drkatz73 | October 8, 2008 10:08 AM | Report abuse

Is that the best you can do? Ridicule a Patriot hero who lives with severe physical limitations for the torture he endured in captivity????

Do you also make fun of amputees????

How low life can you get....and the Washington Post allows you to publish such despicable put downs of Mc Cain?????

All American standards are being eroded by intellectual pygmies like yourself.....

Posted by: accountability_in_gov | October 8, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

kglkg106 writes:

"Hey clobert..

you know why McCain is so "stiff" don't you?? He broke both arms and a leg when he ejected from his A4 Skyhawk over North Vietnam..plus it didn't do him any good that he spent 5 + years in a NVA POW camp.. being tortured on a daily basis ..

How about we string YOU up.. break some legs and some arms... and see how you move.. I'd get a good chuckle over that...

you are a totally dispicable hack....

hopeing to see the post on its way out of bidness... "

Posted by: kglkgl06

I thought his physical effects of his time in a POW camp were abundantly obvious. Yes, he moves stiffly because of those experiences. To say otherwise is dishonest.

It wasn't his physical stiffness I noticed it was a stiffness of the mind. I heard not one clearly defined proposal on any topic raised. Instead, I heard "I know what the problems are, I know what to do, I can fix it. But he never says how.

Whether you are for Obama or not his presentation was clearly better on substance.

Now let me dip into partisanship. Mr. Kglkg106 would probably find kindred spirits at the Wash Times. It is oh so very republican over there. You will be happier chatting with the rest of the desperate right.

Oh, one P.S. McCain was in camp for 5+years. Though it is little comfort the physical torture stopped after two years. Just to be accurate.

Posted by: Thatsnuts | October 8, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama both seem like honorable men - trying their best to get the opportunity to serve their country. We shouldn't hate them because they are politicans and do things we consider to be slimey and political. Afterall that's their job.

But we should carefully scrutinize their judgments, especially when it could impact the economy and national security. And Mr. McCain has made some whoppers lately.

I love McCain, God bless him and protect him but I am voting for Mr. Obama.

Posted by: agapn9 | October 8, 2008 10:16 AM | Report abuse

Yyou hit the nail on the head and described it perfectly. Funny!

Posted by: AverageJane | October 8, 2008 10:19 AM | Report abuse

Hey! My wife wants to know what was with McCain tossing the mike around from one hand to the other every time he finished an answer. Was that supposed to be feisty? He did it every time, so it came of as just silly and sort of petulant. McCain is old and he cannot be president because actuarially it will lead to a Palin presidency, which is what the republican base really wants. Roughly one in three vice presidents succeed their president in office before that president's term has expired for one reason or another. we cannot afford that with Sarah Palin. John McCain put himself that with that purely political pick, not the country.

VOTE DEMOCRAT IN NOVEMBER

Posted by: robertmerry | October 8, 2008 10:26 AM | Report abuse

Sen. John McCain clearly won last night's debate.

Democrats for John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008.

Posted by: hclark1 | October 8, 2008 10:34 AM | Report abuse

McCain and Palin are literally getting to the point of "inciting to riot"...God help us. Is this the kind of leadership that this country wants for our children and grand-children? I would like to say something clever....but I am just too scared. Forty years ago I walked in picket lines for civil rights..."commie, pinko, pervert" were words screamed at us with red faces and shaking fists. Some things change...some do not.

Posted by: rfgtile | October 8, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

AM I MISSING SOMETHING?
(please stop with the brain jokes)

Doesn't McCain preach over and over and over and over and .. over and over about NOT SPENDING?

Then he says to buy all those bad mortgages ($$Billion$$) and to bail out the homeowners whose home prices have dropped below the value of the home....

ISN'T THAT SPENDING? ISN'T THAT SORT OF WELFARE?

They should have not bought something that they cannot afford.

Ever have a car repo'd for non-payment?
Same thing.

McCain is using a gimmick to get some headlines... he's still gonna lose because this idea is not only contrary to his STUMP SPEECHES ... it just won't fly.

Posted by: kkrimmer | October 8, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

What interesting takes on the debate. I definitely didn't think that Senator McCain won the debate. Frankly I didn't think either of them came out clearly ahead on words alone. However, the actions of Sen. McCain as he fidgeted, smirked, postured and grimaced while Sen. Obama was speaking were annoying and distracting. On the other hand, Sen. Obama was respectful and polite.

I'm an independent so I come in without preconceived allegiances. But even if I didn't already plan to vote for Obama, the way McCain has carried himself during this campaign and the fact that his running mate is a twit - have sent me over to the Democrats camp this year.

Posted by: steviesmom | October 8, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Rather than Sanford and Son, what came to me near the end of the debate (after watching Senator McCain's somewhat manic pacing), was the sort of creepiness that he exuded. Beavis and Butthead's "heh heh heh" would have sounded natural coming out of McCain's mouth.

The format was not great for either candidate, but I have to say that Obama certainly did not hurt his chances with his performance.

Posted by: moderateRinPA | October 8, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Hehe - Fred Sanford, maybe. His movements, regardless of cause, were positively gnomish. I kept waiting for McCain to break out giggling and rubbing his palms together.

I was more reminded of Vizzini in Princess Bride ("Vizzini, I don't think this word "inconceivable" means what you think it does"). He was to pleased by his own cleverness by half and less than half as coherent as he needed to be. In a few passages, he made me long for Dubya's grammatical clarity.

Posted by: fr3dmars | October 8, 2008 12:27 PM | Report abuse

Colbert King is a cheap shot artist and I am sure he learned that trait watching "Sanford and Son". You know what came to my mind when I saw McCain moving around . . . there's a man that endured over 5-years of torture in the service of our nation. No wonder your attention span to the issues were so lacking when one considers your choice of television. Chances are Colbert was enjoying his show at the same time Senator McCain was being hung by his arms and beaten.

You should sign your byline, "Cheap Shot King".

Posted by: WeThePeopleofVA | October 8, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

I don't think even Redd Foxx would have referred to anyone as "That One." He might, however, have clutched his heart and called to Elizabeth, up above, that he was about to join her. Didn't John's first wife go that way?

Posted by: boesc | October 8, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

My husband said the same thing - McCain looks like a sick old man.

Posted by: corridorg4 | October 8, 2008 10:11 PM | Report abuse

boesc wrote: I don't think even Redd Foxx would have referred to anyone as "That One."
*******
Fred would have called him, You big dummy.
Luv those reruns posted above.

Posted by: martymar123 | October 8, 2008 10:18 PM | Report abuse

Much of the previous commentary gives me hope that there is still some sense of intelligence and common sense left in the world.

Has anyone else noticed that the political debate process has become a little more than an "open mic" night? Neither candidate really answered questions consistently. Political karaoke for the masses. It was a finger pointing, "push me-pull you," event that left me feeling dissatisfied, disappointed, and basically terrified that no one is willing to say, 'I have no idea how this will play out.' Neither candidate is equipped to take on the Bush Administration's bungling of our nation's well being. No human being is so equipped; left, right or three steps north of nowhere. But for God's sake, admit it and I'll have more respect for you.

Senator Obama seems to have the poise and the intellectual capacity to at least bring together a White House Administration who can address the national crises we face. Senator McCain's choice of Sarah Palin alone tells me that he is not able to do such. And that is no personal knock against Governor Palin. I'm sure she is a decent, lovely human being and possibly an excellent Governor. But let's face it, would you honestly ask your plumber to manage your investment portfolio? Even if he was a fantastic, gifted plumber as well as a swell, upstanding, "Joe six pack" kinda guy?

I think Senator Obama is the only sensible choice. And I value Senator McCain's service to our country and thank him personally for serving me in his capacity as a human being who put his life on the line to make sure I have the freedom to live my life in this country today. But I don't have faith he is capable of taking on such a life and death task as pulling this country back from the brink of absolute disaster.

Posted by: Itsjustme | October 9, 2008 3:20 PM | Report abuse

I am a liberal and a democrat. But, I want the president of my country to be selected based on merits, and not by an overwhelming bias, and propaganda. I don't understand why the media (almost all of them) and liberal-leaning papers like WP, NY Times, LA Times, Boston Globe, etc jump all over, when William Ayers or Tony Rezko's connections with Barack Obama is discussed. After all, if Obama does not have anything to worry, is it not welcome that this thing comes out in the open. Should Obama be protected from any criticism? Didn't the media push us into the Iraq War? They failed us once, and fail us again. In 2000 election, it was painful for me to see the media glowing over Bush as the savior of White House's "integrity" and "morality". We know what we got. Now, it is the media's turn to brainwash everyone into believing Obama has done nothing wrong, and will do none. Please don't push your agenda on us. If there is a story about Obama and Ayers, investigate it, explain it. Don't attack those who bring it in the open. In fact, before Palin talked about it or Clinton brought it, the media should have done that. We don't believe in Hannity. We want YOU to do it for us. Ask Obama why he associated with Ayers, Wright, and Rezko so long and in so much depth. Let the world know what he has to say. Don't push Obama into the White House. Let him earn it. We deserve that, and you (the news media) need to earn that respect, by asking tough questions to Obama too. Don't be a propaganda machine for any party or any candidate. The reason I am a Democrat is because of the dislike I have for right-wing loud mouths. We don't need left-wing cover-up machines. If you believe Obama is good, he'll come out clean. BUT DON'T COVER IT UP.

Posted by: ronniesmith123 | October 10, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company