The Roanoke Times: RoundTable

Comments

# 1

[April 17, 2008 6:44 PM]

Josh

LOL. You can't be serious. This is the very first time Obama has been asked tough potentionally embarrassing questions in a debate. Once again talk radio has been way ahead of the liberal MSM. Sean Hannity had been talking about Wright, Rezko, and Ayers for a year now. The liberal media, once again, is late to the party.

Why do you folks at the Times think Obama's associations don't matter? Once again, you want to give the character issue a pass. Remember the disastrous consequences the last time you did that? We got a president who disgraced his office by being impeached.

This was the first time I have ever heard MSM journalists talk sensibly. Most notable was Charles Gibson's point about how the cutting of the capital gains tax spurred the economy every time it was done in the 90s. That was stunning to hear a network guy tell an obvious truth like that. All Obama could do was sputter that fairness matters more than money, or something equally stupid.

Republicans, of course, are questioned like this all the time. This was a first for Dems. Kudos to Steph and Gibson.

# 2

[April 18, 2008 8:19 AM]

BUD

What's embarrassing are the 2 candidates from this once proud party--one lying about sniper fire and the death of a woman due to no insurance and the other an incompetent talking about HOPE--the HOPE being no one scrutinizes his past record and associations.

# 3

[April 18, 2008 8:35 AM]

Henry

If you browse the Democrat blogs, you'll hear the Obama fans criticing the debate while the Hillary fans say it was a success. Some pro-Hillary blogs are calling it "the end of Obama". I suspect they are right.

I guess we see where the RT lands.

# 4

[April 18, 2008 5:44 PM]

Josh

Widely respected political scientist and journalist Rush Limbaugh believes neither Hillary nor Obama is electable barring some earthshaking event.

I can't ever remember two candidates so unqualified as this pair. Not only has neither ever run any entity, neither seems to have the intelligence or curiosity to understand even the basics of economics or foreign policy.

I am always amazed at how the absurd becomes acceptable to Democrats for believing either is remotely equipped to handle the top job.

You keep waiting for them to bring on the varsity. Then you realize those two ARE the varsity.

# 5

[April 19, 2008 8:29 AM]

Henry

A recent poll showed that 15% of voters thought Obama was a Muslim. That's the strength of the Clinton campaign. They know to win.

Obama is too lightweight to win.

# 6

[April 19, 2008 8:31 AM]

Will

Rush widely respected as a political scientist and journalist? Hummmmmmm...gotta be scraping the barrel pretty deep to draw that conclusion. But then again, if that's one of the conclusions of the right wingers, then it's easy to understand some of the other witty and humorous conclusions they draw.

# 7

[April 19, 2008 9:01 AM]

Blue John

I thought Rush was a drug addict. Didn't he get in trouble for forging prescriptions?

# 8

[April 19, 2008 11:24 AM]

Henry

Will

How do you explain that he has the most popular radio show? No one is even close to him. I don't think that is mere coincidence.

# 9

[April 19, 2008 11:54 AM]

Henry

Hillary's husband is a serial adulterer who committed perjury in a trial where he was accused of sexual harassment. I would say that is a lot worse than taking pain pills.

# 10

[April 19, 2008 1:04 PM]

Blue John

Forging prescriptions is a FELONY.

# 11

[April 19, 2008 3:52 PM]

Henry

So why isn't he in jail? Even Clinton got impeached for his crime.

# 12

[April 19, 2008 4:42 PM]

Josh

Will,

How would you measure the respect given to a journalist or political scientist?

You could either use bogus awards such as the Pulitzer Prize given by liberal writers TO liberal writers OR you go by the number in their audience and the corresponding compensation they command. I prefer the latter.

I recently read a piece in the Washington Post about itself that said although circulation was down, it was offset by the Post writers winning several major awards.

In other words they're toasting each other as the ship sinks. Again, results don't matter to liberals, whether it be in business or government.

# 13

[April 19, 2008 6:24 PM]

Blue John

Henry,

I don't follow Rush Limbaugh and his tripe enough to care why he isn't in jail. I didn't know he was still on the air. The fact that his show is the most popular, according to your previous post, speaks volumes about his listeners (or should I say followers). I do recall that he was detained at a Fla. airport with a bottle of Viagara prescribed to someone else. This occured while his wife was divorcing him. Sometime after this is when he had problems with a pain medication. First time felons don't always go to jail, so maybe that had something to do with it. One must remember the offense occured in Fla., and everyone knows how aboveboard Fla. officials were during Jeb's tenure.

You stated that Clinton was a serial adulterer. I know the radical GOP spent millions of taxpayer dollars on their witchhunt, but I don't recall anything other than the Lewinski set-up. Are there convictions that no one knows about, or is this more of the Rush blather?

Clinton's "impeachment" amounted to nothing more than a censure from some of the most bigoted representatives ever to disgrace the halls of congress. Again, where are they now?
If memory serves me correctly, the Clintons poll numbers were never lower than the current President.

# 14

[April 19, 2008 7:30 PM]

Henry

Clinton was accused of sexual harassment of an Arkansas employee when he was Attorney General. He perjured himself in the trial by denying an ongoing sexual relationship with a young White House intern. He lost his law license over the charge.

Later, Clinton was accused of sexually harassing another White House employee named Kathleen Willey.

I think you mean Clinton's unemployment numbers were never lower than President Bush's.

# 15

[April 19, 2008 8:05 PM]

Blue John

Convictions Henry, not accusations. BIG difference.

# 16

[April 20, 2008 8:30 AM]

Henry

Clinton was impeached and lost his law license for committing perjury.

Why did we spend so much time on Clarence Thomas then? He was never convicted. Richard Nixon was never convicted.

# 17

[April 20, 2008 3:22 PM]

Josh

When you think about it, the Bush administration may be the cleanest of all time. Only one conviction in seven years. And everybody knows the Libby verdict was nothing but a vindictive witchhunt with a verdict arrived at by a highly partisan D.C. jury.

Compare that to the whopping 33 convictions from the Clinton administration.

George W. Bush campaigned on honesty and morality. Voters who valued those traits chose Bush 5 to 1. So character really DOES matter. I think the reason voters welcome tough questioning about Obama's associations is because they were so badly burned by Clinton after giving him a pass on character. Everybody went through 9-11. They've seen what happens when somebody lays down on the job in order to live a secret dishonest life, then spends a year in hiding with his lawyers concocting a defense. The consequences were disastrous the last time we weren't selective on the character issue. We're still paying for it. Americans know they have to be more careful this time.

My only fear is, 16 years is a long time, and some new voters have known only Bush. They accept truth-telling as the norm. They may not fully understand the underlying reasons we have to be in Iraq, and all the catch-up Bush had to do to get the economy and our military strong again. Let's hope those who know the whole story can educate them.

# 18

[April 20, 2008 5:03 PM]

Will

At the end of the day, Bush will be judged by history. None of the pundants who post on this web site are remotely close to being historians.

That being said though, I was talking with someone who perhaps put it best. That person said "Even though Clinton was a womanizer (if that is such a word) at least he didn't have his hand deep in my pocketbook. This administration is costing me more and more with every trip to the grocery store, the drug store and the gas station."

If on balance, you measure the cost of living today versus what the cost of living was a mere 8 years ago, the current administration comes up short in true dollars and cents.

As to whether this administrations decision to invade Iraq was prudent, again time will only tell. The cost of American treasure in this matter is great and can never be replaced. Woe be unto the man who mis-uses that treasure.

The fact of the matter was that Saddam was a bad man...but he was controlable and probably was able to maintain more stability in Iraq than we'll ever dream to be able to do.

I think we missed the mark when we didn't keep Bin Laden squarely in our sights.

# 19

[April 20, 2008 11:37 PM]

Josh

Will,

I think a better barometer of the economy the past 20 years is which party runs Congress. We have indeed had a great run since 1994 with a speed bump after 9-11 and the one we've been for a year or so.

"At the end of the day, Bush will be judged by history."

On this, we can agree. The similarities between the Bush and Lincoln administrations are uncanny. Lincoln, too, was unpopular at the time, but he stood his ground on principle and was vindicated and then celebrated for all time.

# 20

[April 21, 2008 8:59 AM]

Will

I'm reminded of a catchy little saying regarding today's economy...

"It's a recession when you're out of a job...it's a depression when I'm out of a job."