I think it's a mistake to get into a policy debate with Ms. Hilton. No matter what, you end up looking like a fool. If you're a Republican you look like a fool because Paris Hilton just schooled you on energy. If you're a Democrat you look like a fool because why the hell are you arguing policy with Paris Hilton?
I think the sexism was probably more harmful as the misogynary rhetoric. However, it was a sort of feedback loop. Just as Larry Johnson has marginalized whatever he had to say on other topics by his racist ranting against Obama, the complaining about sexism where it didn't exist (using the word periodically to describe something done from time to time) to pointing the sexism accusation at the wrong person (Obama is sexist because someone who isn't Obama said something sexist) it became easier to dismiss.
What I found was that too many people cried wolf, and eventually the shrillness of the 'sexism!' argument became self-defeating.
I think everyone thought it was disgusting. But a good many Clinton supporters apparently thought that it was not only disgusting but then blamed Obama directly for the actions of a couple shock jocks. I, for one, thought the best course of action would be to totally ignore it in the hope that the publicity stunt wouldn't work.
You're painting with an awfully broad brush. You're taking this comment, which indeed was tasteless (although, as usual, I find that the most tasteless part was that it wasn't funny) and applying that to be the attitude of all Obama supporters and, indeed, the candidate himself.
As such, I can just as easily call you a racist troll, because, hey, you're a Hillary supporter, and Larry Johnson's a Hillary supporter.
Do you get it? Stop starting troll feedback loops.
Let's not forget that the LA Times called the Senate Intelligence Committee under Roberts' chairmanship the Senate Cover-Up Committee. He's a corrupt turd and a Bush Administration lackey par excellence.
What I find interesting about that poll is twofold: one, Bush's approval rating stands, even in Kansas, at an anemic 37%. This is a state that went 62% for Bush over Kerry, and an almost identical number over Gore. That 37%, as well as McCain's current standing at 51%, makes Kansas very much in play. If McCain and Robert' fall to under 47%, I'd say an upset is likely.
While the Swift Boat allegations were completely false, they got out there unchallenged for long enough to throw the election to George W. Bush.
The Obama is a Muslim smear e-mail, which as I understand probably started from the same source as this pile of horse manure, got out there and around the world to the point that there's a lot of people, including my dumb as a post stepmother, who believe it.
Shouldn't we be getting out in front of this story and pushing what a ridiculous allegation it is so that when people are on the receiving end of this whisper campaign they know to say "That's retarded?"
How's she going to win in a general election if she can't even win her party's nomination? This is a ridiculous argument.
Obama pulled his punches against Clinton because he didn't want to actually hurt her politically. I see no evidence that the reverse was also true. The Clinton campaign started off flush with cash and with 100 superdelegates, and ended down in the supers, down in the pledged, and deeply in debt.
I have no doubt that McCain is the worst Republican to win their nomination since Alf Landon and that the Democrats could run Conan's masturbating bear against him and win 270 electoral votes.
But to say that the Democratic primary's second place finisher is a stronger general election candidate based on a poll that reflects a Republican party as unified as it's going to get and a Democratic party as divided as it's going to get fails to pass the laugh test.
Fine, there's nothing so objectionable that's actually true about Obama that Democrats won't vote for him. And seriously, you think someone who uses the YouTube will skip the real dirt on McCain and seize on the fake stuff on Obama?
If YouTube is your judge by which candidates are measured, only Giuliani was a worse choice among either Democrats or Republicans than McCain.