Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Huffington Post journalist meekly points out that Obama might not be perfect. Enraged mob en route with torches, pitchforks   (news.yahoo.com) divider line
854
    More: Amusing  
•       •       •

13236 clicks; posted to Main » and Politics » on 21 Feb 2008 at 7:21 PM (15 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



854 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Newest

 
robsul82
2008-02-21 3:47:22 PM  
What the fark is this headline even talking about?

/-1
 
TheConvincingSavant
2008-02-21 3:50:29 PM  
Course he's not perfect he's human, and a Democrat human at that.

Bout time his flock woke up.

/+1
 
Unright
2008-02-21 3:53:04 PM  
robsul82: What the fark is this headline even talking about?

Seriously. There's not a single name mentioned in the entire article. Did subby link to the wrong article?
 
Unright
2008-02-21 3:54:26 PM  
TheConvincingSavant: Course he's not perfect he's human, and a Democrat human at that.

Bout time his flock woke up.

/+1

You don't even click the links anymore, do you? I suppose knowledge *is* a drawback when you're busy trolling...
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2008-02-21 3:58:42 PM  
Unright: Seriously. There's not a single name mentioned in the entire article. Did subby link to the wrong article?

Meh--the article starts off talking about the substance-vs-style debate, then points out that none of the candidates is perfect--but we won't know if journalists don't start asking tougher questions.

A bit of a stretch, but I see what subby did there.
 
Unright
2008-02-21 4:13:53 PM  
SquirrelsOfDoom: Meh--the article starts off talking about the substance-vs-style debate, then points out that none of the candidates is perfect--but we won't know if journalists don't start asking tougher questions.

A bit of a stretch, but I see what subby did there.

Ah, okay. Thanks. I see it now, too. I guess mentioning Obama will get anything greenlit these days.
 
TheConvincingSavant
2008-02-21 4:16:26 PM  
Unright: TheConvincingSavant: Course he's not perfect he's human, and a Democrat human at that.

Bout time his flock woke up.

/+1

You don't even click the links anymore, do you?

What are you talking about? Is it the lack of sources cited? If it is, have you read the McCain sex scandal story yet?

Simple facts are we depend on journalists to grill the candidates on tough issues in order to make a more informed decision when we go to the polls. Journalists are doing two-thirds of their job right now.

I mean it's not Reagan that Barry is running against. What do they have to fear?
 
miseducated
2008-02-21 4:27:54 PM  
TheConvincingSavant: Course he's not perfect he's human, and a Democrat human at that.

Bout time his flock woke up.

You may want to start reading the articles yourself, rather than cleaning your medals and waiting for your wife to dicate them to you later.
 
Jon Snow
2008-02-21 4:30:27 PM  
I mostly agree with the author's general thrust that the mainstream press isn't really doing much hard-hitting investigative reporting anymore. The Presidential coverage is much more about creating and selling a narrative that each outlet assumes authority on for them.

But the other factor is that in response to the media exploitation of gaffes and contradictions, politicians are less and less likely to provide the kind of detailed plans and opinions the author seems to be looking for- or worse, when he or she does it is met with either ridicule for having the naiveté to go on the record (Pakistan), or is ignored completely despite clear policy decisions to be praised and criticized (Energy policy).

However, there are plenty of smaller places like TPM and Politico that find and forward news. Even more so, blogs and sites dedicated to individual issues often do an excellent job of establishing a candidates record and positions.
 
Jon Snow
2008-02-21 4:32:01 PM  
a candidate's record and positions.

FTFM
 
The Stealth Hippopotamus
2008-02-21 4:37:16 PM  
I got flamed just for saying that he was trying to win the election just as much as Hillary.

I think all the Ron Paul people have moved over to the Obama camp
 
TheConvincingSavant
2008-02-21 4:38:34 PM  
miseducated: You may want to start reading the articles yourself...

Had you read the rest of this thread yourself, you'd notice that I had.
 
miseducated
2008-02-21 4:39:04 PM  
The Stealth Hippopotamus: I got flamed just for saying that he was trying to win the election just as much as Hillary.

In which thread?
 
miseducated
2008-02-21 4:47:18 PM  
TheConvincingSavant: Had you read the rest of this thread yourself, you'd notice that I had.

Had you read your own two posts, you'd see that they had nothing to do with one another.

Here's what you did (And I can't fault you that much, since nearly everyone does it). You read the headline, agreed, and posted without actually reading the article. Then when Unright notices that your comment wasn't a reply to the article, but to the headline, he called you out.

So then you read the article, and come back with a (barely coherent) retort that was meant to address a wider issue - namely the failure of journalists to inform the American electorate, and the failure of the American electorate to inform themselves.

Which is all fair and good, but I don't see what that has to do with the reality that Obama isn't perfect. Those are two entirely different discussions.

Sucks that Fark doesn't have a feature for editing your comments after the fact, huh?
 
palladiate [TotalFark]
2008-02-21 4:52:05 PM  
miseducated: Sucks that Fark doesn't have a feature for editing your comments after the fact, huh?

Quoted for truth?
 
The Stealth Hippopotamus
2008-02-21 5:02:36 PM  
miseducated: In which thread?

http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=3412427 (pops)
It all started on the up & up. And as the story normally goes, the thread jumped the tracks and then jumped the shark.
 
TheConvincingSavant
2008-02-21 5:03:25 PM  
miseducated: Had you read your own two posts, you'd see that they had nothing to do with one another.

Here's what you did (And I can't fault you that much, since nearly everyone does it). You read the headline, agreed, and posted without actually reading the article. Then when Unright notices that your comment wasn't a reply to the article, but to the headline, he called you out.

So then you read the article, and come back with a (barely coherent) retort that was meant to address a wider issue - namely the failure of journalists to inform the American electorate, and the failure of the American electorate to inform themselves.

Which is all fair and good, but I don't see what that has to do with the reality that Obama isn't perfect. Those are two entirely different discussions.

*sigh*

How does the original comment not correlate to the second? This comment from the article...

Each type of change leader, commanding, logical, inspirational, and supportive, has his or her strengths and weaknesses.

...is talking about change leaders. Now I'll let it slide that you may not be up on all the current slogans of each candidate, but you should know who the two change candidates are, and you should know who's been using that word the most.

But hey, since it's you asking, I'll try to be less complex in my wording next time.
 
Jon Snow
2008-02-21 5:15:39 PM  
The Stealth Hippopotamus: I got flamed just for saying that he was trying to win the election just as much as Hillary.

I think all the Ron Paul people have moved over to the Obama camp

miseducated: In which thread?

The Stealth Hippopotamus: http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=3412427 (pops)
It all started on the up & up. And as the story normally goes, the thread jumped the tracks and then jumped the shark.

Where did you get flamed for "saying that he was trying to win the election just as much as Hillary"? I can't find it.
 
Unright
2008-02-21 5:35:19 PM  
TheConvincingSavant: How does the original comment not correlate to the second? This comment from the article...

Each type of change leader, commanding, logical, inspirational, and supportive, has his or her strengths and weaknesses.

...is talking about change leaders. Now I'll let it slide that you may not be up on all the current slogans of each candidate, but you should know who the two change candidates are, and you should know who's been using that word the most.

But hey, since it's you asking, I'll try to be less complex in my wording next time.

Then I take it you didn't click on the "change leader" link. Damnit, TCS. Just admit you didn't read the article before posting your Boobies. We know you're human and make mistakes. Just man up and admit to them.
 
Churchill2004
2008-02-21 5:53:14 PM  
The Stealth Hippopotamus: I think all the Ron Paul people have moved over to the Obama camp

Not at all. Wait around long enough and you'll see the unique brand of vitriol that will go after any statement short of an endorsement for Obama from a Ron Paul supporter.

As for Obama, it's not that he's "all style, no substance", it's that his grandiose style hides a much less noteworthy substance.
 
TheConvincingSavant
2008-02-21 6:05:42 PM  
Unright: TheConvincingSavant: How does the original comment not correlate to the second? This comment from the article...

Each type of change leader, commanding, logical, inspirational, and supportive, has his or her strengths and weaknesses.

...is talking about change leaders. Now I'll let it slide that you may not be up on all the current slogans of each candidate, but you should know who the two change candidates are, and you should know who's been using that word the most.

But hey, since it's you asking, I'll try to be less complex in my wording next time.

Then I take it you didn't click on the "change leader" link. Damnit, TCS. Just admit you didn't read the article before posting your Boobies. We know you're human and make mistakes. Just man up and admit to them.

No, I didn't click on the link inside of the article, is it talking about someone other than the candidates running?

I did see this in the article, however:

Most of us are ready to hear what the candidates plan to do about health care, Iraq, terrorism, social security, the failing economy, lead in children's toys, and a host of other issues that "momentum," "experience" and some vague notion of "change" can't effectively address without intense study and superb problem-solving.

I know my words have a tendency of going over a few heads, but I fail to see what you're having so much trouble with. How about instead of telling me how I didn't read the article, you would care to discuss it? I know you were having trouble, but by your third post, you seem to have figured it out.
 
Lionel Mandrake
2008-02-21 6:14:52 PM  
TheConvincingSavant: Bout time his flock woke up.

Good luck with that. I've been trying for years to rouse Reaganauts from that opioid fantasy world where St. Ronnie was a great President.

One of the most entertaining sideshows of this primary is watching people who get misty-eyed over Reagan make fun of Obamaniacs.
 
TheConvincingSavant
2008-02-21 6:17:37 PM  
Lionel Mandrake: TheConvincingSavant: Bout time his flock woke up.

Good luck with that. I've been trying for years to rouse Reaganauts from that opioid fantasy world where St. Ronnie was a great President.

One of the most entertaining sideshows of this primary is watching people who get misty-eyed over Reagan make fun of Obamaniacs.

Hey, you leave Reagan out of this. Don't make me come through this monitor.
 
miseducated
2008-02-21 6:21:00 PM  
The Stealth Hippopotamus: It all started on the up & up. And as the story normally goes, the thread jumped the tracks and then jumped the shark.

I just ctrl+f'd your username, and nothing you said, nor any of the replies in that thread, even remotely resemble what you just described.

TheConvincingSavant: ...is talking about change leaders. Now I'll let it slide that you may not be up on all the current slogans of each candidate, but you should know who the two change candidates are, and you should know who's been using that word the most.

But hey, since it's you asking, I'll try to be less complex in my wording next time.

What?

...

Oh I get it. From now on when I read your posts, I should just assume that you meant something completely unrelated to what you just said. Give me three or four more posts to figure out your cipher and we're all set. Then it'll be all like:

TCS: I need scissors. 61!

miseducated: Ah, how astute. Why yes, I agree that Tom Robbins' body of work is highly overrated, if not merely sophomoric. (Blows soap bubbles from plastic pipe)
 
TheConvincingSavant
2008-02-21 6:51:21 PM  
miseducated: The Stealth Hippopotamus: It all started on the up & up. And as the story normally goes, the thread jumped the tracks and then jumped the shark.

I just ctrl+f'd your username, and nothing you said, nor any of the replies in that thread, even remotely resemble what you just described.

TheConvincingSavant: ...is talking about change leaders. Now I'll let it slide that you may not be up on all the current slogans of each candidate, but you should know who the two change candidates are, and you should know who's been using that word the most.

But hey, since it's you asking, I'll try to be less complex in my wording next time.

What?

...

Oh I get it. From now on when I read your posts, I should just assume that you meant something completely unrelated to what you just said. Give me three or four more posts to figure out your cipher and we're all set. Then it'll be all like:

TCS: I need scissors. 61!

miseducated: Ah, how astute. Why yes, I agree that Tom Robbins' body of work is highly overrated, if not merely sophomoric. (Blows soap bubbles from plastic pipe)

Or you could just ask me what I meant instead of throwing a tantrum.
 
palladiate [TotalFark]
2008-02-21 7:07:47 PM  
TheConvincingSavant: Or you could just ask me what I meant instead of throwing a tantrum.

That may be because after reading a few of your posts, the average person wouldn't believe you to tell them their own name.
 
TheConvincingSavant
2008-02-21 7:11:41 PM  
Average people wouldn't need my help with their own names.
 
Megain
2008-02-21 7:20:33 PM  
TheConvincingSavant: Average people wouldn't need my help with their own names.

the average person asking you what their name is would need some help, though i agree that they wouldn't need yours
 
zenarche
2008-02-21 7:25:40 PM  
Has anyone been able to find a link for the debate tonight, live online?

I don't have cable and I'd hate to miss it. I see right now CNN online has some silent footage of the preparations, but I'm not sure if that's going to be broadcast with audio at 8:00.
 
jpbreon
2008-02-21 7:27:08 PM  
He's not perfect, no. He's just that much better than all the rest. People like TheConvincingSavant are gearing up the vitriol as Obama's momentum gains.
 
robsul82
2008-02-21 7:27:34 PM  
Churchill2004: The Stealth Hippopotamus: I think all the Ron Paul people have moved over to the Obama camp

Not at all. Wait around long enough and you'll see the unique brand of vitriol that will go after any statement short of an endorsement for Obama from a Ron Paul supporter.

As for Obama, it's not that he's "all style, no substance", it's that his grandiose style hides a much less noteworthy substance.

blogsimages.skynet.beView Full Size


Buck up, buttercup.
 
zenarche
2008-02-21 7:28:59 PM  
Wow, ask and ye shall receive. Two seconds after posting, the video/audio finally changed.

Impeccable timing!

Link to live stream:

http://www.cnn.com/video/live/live.html?stream=stream1
 
Darth Shatner
2008-02-21 7:29:03 PM  
I'm sure another speech about glittery rainbow cities inhabited by purple unicorns and fluffy bunnies will wash over his masses turning them into back into socialist zombies!

DNRTFA
 
eeedlef
2008-02-21 7:29:12 PM  
Headline sounds a lot like this place.
 
Murkanen
2008-02-21 7:29:37 PM  
TheConvincingSavant:

Democrat human

You failed the grammar part of your english classes didn't you?
 
Megain
2008-02-21 7:31:59 PM  
zenarche: Has anyone been able to find a link for the debate tonight, live online?

here:
The program will air live from the LBJ Auditorium at the University of Texas in Austin on CNN and on CNN International from 8 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. (ET)/7p.m. to 8:30 p.m. (CT) and will air in Spanish on the Univision Network beginning at 11:30 p.m. (ET)/10:30 p.m. (CT). It will also stream live on CNN.com and will later be available on demand on both on Univision.com and CNN.com. It will also re-air on CNN and CNN en Espanol.
 
Richard Pye
2008-02-21 7:32:02 PM  
I think that TheConvincingSavant is quite possibly the stupidest person to ever have lived. That's quite a claim, I know, but I stand by it.
 
Megain
2008-02-21 7:32:51 PM  
zenarche: Wow, ask and ye shall receive. Two seconds after posting, the video/audio finally changed.

Impeccable timing!

Link to live stream:

http://www.cnn.com/video/live/live.html?stream=stream1

slow, but i tried. i'm getting old. heh
 
One F Jef
2008-02-21 7:33:28 PM  
TheConvincingSavant: Course he's not perfect he's human, and a Democrat human at that.

Bout time his flock woke up.

/+1

img297.imageshack.usView Full Size
 
NeverDrunk23
2008-02-21 7:33:45 PM  
eeedlef: Headline sounds a lot like this place.


Please, Farkers don't get wound up so much about every little thing or hold grudges longer than the actual people involved in a situation. People here do not take every little critique as a life-threatening assault. That was a wrong assumption you made there, you low-life, whiney, pissant little jackass. Go DIAF, you heathen!
 
SAvoodoo
2008-02-21 7:33:50 PM  
F*CK YOU!

/drtfa
 
robsul82
2008-02-21 7:33:52 PM  
Murkanen: TheConvincingSavant:

Democrat human

You failed the grammar part of your english classes didn't you?

No no, see, only calling Barack Obama "Barry" and never failing to fail to say "Democratic" are just coincidences. Totally unrelated to the Core of his political philosophy.
 
Eat The Placenta
2008-02-21 7:33:55 PM  
FTA: "Historians will reveal in years to come how we allowed ourselves to be convinced by people who were supposed to report what others with expertise have to say. Instead, they trained us to accept corporate media enterprises hiring good talkers to interview each other"

speak for yourself and the rest of the lemmings, biatch. I have never accepted any single source of information. Intelligent people know how dangerous that can be. Take the Bible for example...

/poor at trolling
/slash me!
 
Richard Pye
2008-02-21 7:35:19 PM  
robsul82: Totally unrelated to the Corps of his political philosophy.

FTFY
 
robsul82
2008-02-21 7:36:41 PM  
Richard Pye: robsul82: Totally unrelated to the Corps of his political philosophy.

FTFY

You didn't fix NOTHIN', soldier!
 
Richard Pye
2008-02-21 7:37:28 PM  
robsul82: ou didn't fix NOTHIN', soldier!

Actually I'm a Marine, we're not soldiers. Or we are, I forget.
 
radioshack
2008-02-21 7:38:30 PM  
Unright: Seriously. There's not a single name mentioned in the entire article. Did subby link to the wrong article?

FTA:Most of us are ready to hear what the candidates plan to do about health care, Iraq, terrorism, social security, the failing economy, lead in children's toys, and a host of other issues that "momentum," "experience" and some vague notion of "change" can't effectively address without intense study and superb problem-solving.

If you can't figure out he's talking about Obama, you may be part of the problem he's talking about.
 
Hideously Gigantic Smurf
2008-02-21 7:38:37 PM  
Sounds more like he's ragging on journalists than Obama, or any candidate for that matter.
 
The_Sponge [TotalFark]
2008-02-21 7:38:54 PM  
His stance on The Second Amendment is the farthest thing from perfect.
 
jpbreon
2008-02-21 7:39:17 PM  
Richard Pye: I think that TheConvincingSavant is quite possibly the stupidest person to ever have lived. That's quite a claim, I know, but I stand by it.

I don't think he is stupid, quite the contrary actually. Right now the Republicans are faced with a terrible situation. McCain is at best a mediocre candidate, suffering without a serious contender because the Republican race is over and the media will be focusing all the attention on the Democratic race. McCain will be a figment of our imagination by the time the general rolls around.

The only hope is to keep McCain's face in the news, or even better, start firing off rounds at the Democrats to keep America's razor thin attention span on the righties. It must be annoying that Obama generates so much interest while McCain does nothing more than illicit a collective "meh".
 
Displayed 50 of 854 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Newest



Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

More funny for your money.

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.