Sunday, November 2, 2008


And here's PH's response.

""KC", you are vooping and it is out of emotion. You sound like an emotional wreck. Going on and on saying nothing. Did you study Mass Communication? Because if you did you would have learnt that every University teaches that who the media favours in a US election tend to win the elections. So far only Ronald Reagan defied that. If Obama does, it's the media and 600 million dollars in campaign spending that did it for him.

"KC are you a journalist? Because if you are, I sure would have expected a more level headed response ---as the kind of media bias towards Obama is a poor example of what journalism is and what is expected of journalists.

"Forget Hillary, she faced a gender issue, the people chose the lesser of two evils, media icons stated outright that they did not want a woman for President and buried Hillary as fast as they could. You really think Obama would of reached that far if he did not have that kind of media support? If Obama wins, it's the media that carried him, if he loses it's the media that made him lose. Don't you think the significant imbalanced bias for Obama could also kill him?

"If Obama had stuck to his agreement with McCain and depended on federal funding, imagine the blow out he would have gotten...the fact is that it took $600 million and 80% media favouritism to get him this far in the game. That might be great, but it is not greatness on Obama's part.

"If McCain raised money the way Obama did, he would have been 15 points ahead already. And so should Obama with the tide on his side, but the fact is that he is only between 3 and 7 points ahead according to fluctuating and varying polls. Everyone sees the world is for Obama, but that is irrelevant.

"Are you saying KC that because Obama is black the media have a right to throw objectivity out the window? Pity how emotions twist our minds and thinking. Come better than the black argument."