In this morning's editorial the Brokeback Beacon tells Hillary...."I just can't quit you".....
This newspaper still thinks Hillary Clinton would be the better president. Yes, she has pandered relentlessly calling for a summer of relief from the federal gas tax. Worth attention is the larger theme that she has struck, the undue burden carried by the middle class, especially in view of a tax code that has favored increasingly the wealthy. All of it has been part of her speaking more comprehensively about what would drive a Clinton presidency. She has become a stronger candidate and a more effective leader.
Notice the thought processes of the Brokeback Beacon editorial. Hillary is a panderer, basically a person who will say anything to voters in order to get their votes, Obama is not a panderer.....but the Brokeback Beacon simply can't quit the panderer, choosing instead to argue that the non-panderer wouldn't make as good a president as the panderer.
Pandering is lying. Pandering is saying whatever people want to hear whether the speaker has any intention of fulfilling any of the promises or not. Obama has refused to lie. Hillary has been called out numerous times for making stuff up.
Why does the Brokeback Beacon editorialist think that Hillary's lying shouldn't disqualify her? "..the larger theme she has struck, the undue burden carried by the middle class, especially...a tax code that has favored the wealthy..." The truth, of course, is something else entirely. Not only has Hillary DISAGREED with Obama's plan to raise capital gains taxes, lowered unjustly and unfairly by Bush Buffoons .....but she also disagrees with Obama over lifting the payroll tax cap on Social Security wages. Both of Hillary's positions here are no different from John McCain's. Perhaps THAT is what the Beacon writer meant by "the larger theme she has struck".
Then the Brokeback Beacon writer, still swooning for Hillary, writes this....
The talking heads of the media often have swooned for Obama.
I have been paying attention to this primary. The media hasn't "swooned" over Obama for months. The reason is simple and straightforward. Hillary was the frontrunner even before the election cycle began. Main media always attacks the leading Democratic frontrunner, never a Republican frontrunner as we see with McCain.....but always the Democratic frontrunner. They attacked Hillary early because they thought she would be the Democratic nominee. Then after Obama's 11 victories in a row, the main media began savaging Obama. Not "swooning"....savaging. The savaging still goes on. If anything is true.....the last month has seen the main media superassholes shilling for Hillary.
And finally, from today's Brokeback Beacon script, we find the wingnut theme of, "What about Florida and Michigan?".....
The national party bungled the issue. Obama ducked new primaries. Link
Assertions like that shouldn't be in an editorial in a city's only newspaper. Somehow, Brokeback Beacon writers have bought into the wingnut controversy over two states which defied Democratic National Committee rules. According to the Beacon, the Democrats "bungled the issue". How so? No explanation.....only an assertion. They just did. Both candidates, Obama and Clinton, agreed months ago that Florida and Michigan primaries would not count. Even if Hillary were able to count those two states, she STILL can't win the nomination fair and square. Brokeback Beacon is simply buying into the wingnut bullsh*t.
Sore losers can really be sore.....and that's what the Brokeback Beacon is after Tuesday's primaries. Obama hasn't "ducked" anything. Barack Obama has stated repeatedly he will abide by the rules. Abiding by the rules is, to Brokeback Beacon writers, "ducking new primaries". Hillary (and George W. Bush), on the other hand, never met a rule that couldn't be overruled for their own benefit or ideology. Sticking to a framework of previously agreed upon rules, laws, conditions......is a bad thing according to the Beacon writer....that's "ducking" something.
When all is said and done this election cycle, the Beacon editorialists will be endorsing John McCain over Barack Obama for president. There won't be any good reasons then either, just as there are no good reasons to still be shilling for a pandering, do-and-say-anything-to-get-elected, Hillary Clinton now.
Apparently the Beacon just can't quit their allegiance to the establishment status quo.
About This Blog