drop the holier than thou, mad as hell attitude.  

I just spent the last six months having that precise attitude shoved down my throat every time I encountered another utterly sold Obama supporter.

Now it's not okay, good to know.

Look, I think the point here is that it's just going to be a lot more difficult to use the tactics that worked against HRC against McCain.  She was the most unpopular woman in America, remember?  You could accuse her of anything (even coveting an assassination, for the love of God) and it would stick.  

I don't believe I've ever read anything that has said anything about Obama's sense of humor.  

So let me get this straight...
...I am supposed to read sexism into anything Senator Obama says about Senator Clinton that is not 100% positive as dismissive or sexist or hateful, but Senator McCain says and does openly sexist, dismissive and hateful things and you get upset when reminded of that because...why?

ok, for 9,337th time, for those of you riding the short bus. no, you aren't, unless, for reasons not made clear in your post, you feel so compelled.

there's been enough spewed forth from the obama campaign, and its frothing MSM minions, that is clearly sexist, bordering (actually, nearly falling into the abyss) on misogony, that one needn't "read" anything, it's flagrantly obvious, even to self proclaimed dullards. even some from sen. obama himself, in a good way of course.

if you've not noticed it, then you haven't been paying attention. your choice. but then, don't come in here, or anywhere thinking people reside, and act all confused. maybe it isn't an act. worse, i think.

 I'm saying that some are loyal to the Democrats, some are not, and now one set is whining about a stolen primary and a flawed candidate, one set is not (and to my knowledge never has). So we're supposed to embrace an electability argment (read: lowest common denominator) but not a "lesser of two evils" argument?

not kucinich, not feingold, not guys like that.

but almost every one of them will do and say things that seem out of character or designed to pander to whatever group they're talking to.

you're right that watching this meme thrown at hillary for a year has made it tough to hear.  and i don't think that mccain --the person with the POW story-- is ever going to find himself in trouble because of this kind of attack.  

I was providing some info for you, and anyone else, with the same thought.

a stump speech isn't the place to lay out boring policy minutia.

He's not perfect but he's what we got so get yer head wrapped around it

He's what you've got.  Get yer head wrapped around that.

He doesn't have to come to my door.

I don't care about the "policy positions" he holds or the website papers written by academics -- I want to know what his record of implementation is. I want to know his history of action. His policies have clearly waffled. And a senator can have any position he wants -- but does he have any ability to negotiate with a fractious Congress?

No, I can't give up my job and my family to become a political researcher. But newspaper reporters used to be paid to do that, rather than be fans and fawning entertainers.

We expect politicians to lie. We expect the MSM to tell us when they do.

Any marketing manager knows, it isn't enough to get people to come to the store.  You have to get them to buy your brand.  You've wasted all your time if you get them to come to the store but they buy the other guy's brand once they get there.  

It's not up to the consumer to do the research.  That is what advertising is for.  Sometimes, it really helps to read the brochure to people because they may not buy your product if they don't understand the benefits of it.  Good advertising educates consumers.  

Stump speeches are sound bites.  If you want to know anything about a candidate, it's best to get past what can be espoused in fifteen minutes.  Some of those highlights are in those speeches, but reducing complex issues to platitudes is no way to communicate the requisite complex positions.

Look, folks, I am not trying to get into an insult match.  I thought there was some seriousness about wanting to know the policy positions of the Dem nominee and I've said my bit and provided the links for anyone reading who wants to actually know to read up on them.  Do with them what you will.

Please consider my future lack of response to leading insults as an answer.  If anyone wants to talk seriously about anything, I'm all ears.

But in short, we used to expect to get information from the MSM.  It was never very much or very good, but it was all we had.  Now we have to dig deeper ourselves and read/question more sources.

Harder work, more fulfilling.

-night suisser/all