[Rhodes22-list] POLITICAL: conservative talk show host endorses Obama

[Herb Parsons]

What is the point Pete?

I don't base my choice on the choice of others. I answered your 
question, you wont' answer mine. Hell, you can't even get your facts 
correct.


petelargo wrote:
> ok herb. i'll lower the bar all the way down. find me couple of notable and
> known liberals voting for mccain. post the links of their endorsements.  
>
>
> hparsons wrote:
>   
>> Let's look at your statement a bit. I say "your statement" because you 
>> didn't read their article closely enough, and missed a few things.
>>
>> While it's true that the paper has been in existence for over 150 years, 
>> their first endorsement for a Republican presidential nominee was in 
>> 1860 for Abraham Lincoln. That was 148 years ago, not "over 150 years".
>>
>> While it's also true that they've never endorsed a Democrat for 
>> President, it's NOT true that they've "consecutively and continuously" 
>> endorsed Republicans.
>>
>> First of all, they've endorsed MANY Democratic candidates for other 
>> offices, including Barak Obama for senator.
>>
>> Even in the presidential elections, they have not "consecutively and 
>> continuously" endorsed Republicans.
>>
>> First of all, they endorsed Horace Greeley in 1872, who was a member of 
>> the "Liberal Republican Party". That was NOT the Republican party, in 
>> fact he ran against Republican Ulysses S Grant. He was nominated by the 
>> new party, and subsequently endorsed by the Democratic party. That would 
>> be pretty close to the paper endorsing a Democrat, but it's definitely 
>> NOT the paper endorsing the Republican candidate, who was Grant.
>>
>> Greeley lost.
>>
>> In 1912, the paper endorsed Theodore Roosevelt who ran against 
>> Republican William Taft and Democrat Woodrow Wilson.
>>
>> Roosevelt lost.
>>
>> Your facts are wrong. You probably ought to curb your excitement a bit, 
>> ignore the tingle up your leg, and get a little more informed.
>>
>> But, there are other underlying facts as well...
>>
>> Last year the paper was part of a leveraged buyout, and is now under new 
>> ownership. The new owner contributes to both parties heavily (and more 
>> to Republicans than Democrats), but he is a businessman, and the 
>> newspaper is a business that his having problems. Obama is a widely 
>> popular candidate in Chicago, and will take his state without a doubt. I 
>> suspect that the paper's motive might have a little to do with trying to 
>> sell papers, but that's just a guess.
>>
>> To answer your question, I don't know of a paper that fits your 
>> description, so don't bother waiting. However, I'm wondering how long 
>> you're going to keep ME waiting for the question I've continued to ask.
>>
>> What's your point?
>>
>> petelargo wrote:
>>     
>>> Here you go 'Last-Word-Herb'. The Chicago Tribune has just endorsed obama
>>> after over 150 years of consecutively and continuously endorsing
>>> republicans. Find a newspaper that has endorsed a democratic nominee for
>>> president for 150 years in a row and is now endorsing McCain. Try not to
>>> keep me waiting as long as katie couric has been waiting for sister sarah
>>> to
>>> get back to her on all those examples of mccains regulatory history. 
>>>
>>> http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-tribune-endorsementoct18,0,3250801.story
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> hparsons wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Pete,
>>>>
>>>> I really don't understand your point on the constant harping on 
>>>> "conservatives" that are voting for a far left wing liberal.
>>>>
>>>> Is your point that some folks are crossing over? If so, trust me, we all 
>>>> some are, both directions. LOTS of libs voting for McCain as well.
>>>>
>>>> Is your point that you suddenly respect the opinion of conservatives? If 
>>>> so, you probably need to know, there are more conservatives that are 
>>>> voting for McCain than Obama. I'll be happy to give you a list of some 
>>>> of the better known names, if you're that easily swayed.
>>>>
>>>> I suspect the REAL reason though, is that the only opinions that matter 
>>>> are those that match yours, and then you suddenly believe that makes it 
>>>> "noteworthy". Trust me, it's not.
>>>> ;)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> petelargo wrote:
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>>> On his talk show on WPHT today, conservative Philadelphian Michael
>>>>> Smerconish
>>>>> endorsed Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. Smerconish did so by reading a
>>>>> couple
>>>>> paragraphs from his pending op-ed in the Philadelphia Inquirer.
>>>>>
>>>>> "I've decided," he said. "My conclusion comes after reading the
>>>>> candidates'
>>>>> memoirs and campaign platforms, attending both party conventions,
>>>>> interviewing both men multiple times, and watching all primary and
>>>>> general
>>>>>           
>>>>> election debates.
>>>>>
>>>>> "John McCain is an honorable man who has served his country well. But
>>>>> he
>>>>> will not get my vote. For the first time since registering as a
>>>>> Republican
>>>>> 28 years ago, I'm voting for a Democrat for president.
>>>>>   
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>   
>>>       
>> __________________________________________________
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>
>>     
>
>