NY Times Refuses To Print McCain’s Op-Ed While Analysts Downgrade Them
By Uppity Woman on July 21, 2008 at 9:22 PM in Afghanistan, Barack Obama, Current Affairs, Foreign Policy, Foreign affairs, Iraq, John McCain, New York Times
The McCain Campaign Says NY Times Refused to Print his Op-Ed Response to Barack Obama. Apparently, John McCain didn’t tell them what they wanted to hear so they decided not to print his response. In other words, Mr. McCain is to provide a timetable for leaving Iraq, no matter what—or else.
Having finally admitted publicly that they truly believe they should be running the country and telling candidates what their plans and opinions should be, the Times had this to say after sending John McCain to the Principal’s Office:
“I’d be very eager to publish the senator on the op-ed page. However, I’m not going to be able to accept this piece as currently written. I’d be pleased, though, to look at another draft. Let me suggest an approach,” Times op-ed editor David Shipley wrote the campaign via an e-mail later distributed by McCain’s team.
“It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama’s piece. To that end, the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq. It would also have to lay out a clear plan for achieving victory — with troops levels, timetables and measures for compelling the Iraqis to cooperate. And it would need to describe the Senator’s Afghanistan strategy, spelling out how it meshes with his Iraq plan,” Shipley wrote.
Well that’s terrific of you, Mr. Shipley, but I kind of prefer to make my own decisions about candidates, if you don’t mind.
Do you have any idea how pompous your remarks look? I would like to think that nobody needs to break the “news” to you that you are in the business of covering the news not dictating candidate platforms, governing America and picking presidents. Truly sir, we already know that the only reason you are endorsing Barack Obama is Karl Marx isn’t available. John McCain isn’t your 10th Grade English student, he’s a candidate for the President of the United States and you are a guy who buys ink by the barrels–which somehow makes you imagine you should dictate American Foreign Policy.
The McCain Campaign had a few things to say about this attempt at controlling their opinions, also known as “Write what I say or get lost”:
McCain campaign Communications Director Jill Hazelbaker said the two candidates “have very different world views” about Iraq and the campaign wanted an opportunity to state its candidate’s view.
“We have elections in this country, not coronations and it’s unfortunate that The New York Times wouldn’t allow their readers to hear from John McCain and make their own judgment,” Hazelbaker told FOX News.
In the meantime, the July 10 share price of New York Times Company touched its lowest point in a decade.
The share price of the New York Times Company touched its lowest point in more than a decade yesterday after an analyst cut his price target and predicted shares will weaken over time. The stock lost 96 cents, or 6.4%, to $14.10 in late-afternoon trading. Earlier in the day, shares touched a low of $13.91, their lowest level since September 1997. (Via HuffPost/AP)
One would think that if the New York Times Company’s shares are tanking, it would be kind of arrogant to imagine anyone with a brain wants them telling candidates what their platforms should consist of, much less telling them how they should plan to govern America.
There’s an old saying that you can’t argue with the people who buy ink by the barrels. Apparently you can. You can stop reading their product and watch their stock land in the crapper.
You have done it again Uppity Woman…When I saw this at LGF via Drudge I couldn’t believe how arrogant the times had become….perfect match for Obama…we can watch them go down together now.
:-[
I hope I’m wrong but
(ok I just saw a bit of Jon Stewart)
it’s worse than we think
THIS blog and a few more like it are like a pearl necklace chain of islands in a DEEP SEA of BHO CHANGE
it’s too late
I’m afraid it’s just too late
He’s been bought and paid for by the American & foreign Elite
the kids have hopey on their lips
and change on their MINDS
the blacks and half the DEMS are gonna roll right over that ledge singing WE ARE the WORLD (ala Michael J) and Mr. Stinky is “POOF” the new Planet Earth Master Blaster!
sigh - please don’t tell me Mad Max forgives him for what he did? that will bring me to tears!
I know how you feel. Many in the mainstream media are working very hard to make it appear as if it is inevitable that Obama will become president. It is not a sure thing until after the votes are counted, and even then….well you know what happened in the primaries.
No matter what the media says, even if they say Obama leads McCain by 99% to 1%, I will still drag myself to a voting booth to vote Nobama.
http://formerobamasupporters.com/
Nonsense. That’s just what the media wants you to think. Did you go to the the piece Tom Abrahams did yesterday on what the polls look like? Well, it didn’t look good at first glance, but follow the links and you will see that the numbers don’t add up. The race is indeed virtually tied. Right now, there are many swing states in play, and dems think they can pocket several states they cannot win.
Just an observation, but when it’s reported that Obama’s numbers are falling, the polls immediately raise his numbers instead of lowering them. Also, they are not taking into account all the repubs that voted for Clinton, but will now be following their own party, and of course, they are not counting PUMAs.
Went to one polling site and they actually said that PUMAs are a bunch of “crazies” and count as a liability for McCain. And went on to say that we are called with a “dog whistle,” so don’t be fooled. The polls are putting PUMAs in the bo column, won’t they be surprised in November?
Don’t buy it… FIGHT IT WITH YOUR VOTE!
They want to make it look like a done deal so we will fall in line (thinking that that’s the only way our vote will count), or stay home (thinking why bother).
But it’s very important that no matter how you feel, when the time comes, get out there and give your vote to anyone but the stinky one.
Back when Bill Keller took it upon himself to withhold information about the warrantless wire tapping, I wrote him an email calling him on his interference with process and cancelling my subscription. I suggested that his actions might be used in future journalism classes about what bad journalism is. I received an email back from him justifying (unsuccessful) the stand of the Times.
“All the news that’s fit to print” apparently only applies if it’s positive about Obama.
We are seeing the self-imolation of what was once a great newspaper. They are in danger of becoming another “Pravda”! Look at the bright side…think of all the trees we’re going to save!
All of us who feel strongly about this need to do more than complain to each other. Each of us needs to complain directly to the Times. The media responds to a deluge of complaints. It will be particularly effective if, when we email, we make it clear that we are not Republicans and that we want to see balanced coverage of both candidates.
One comment that the Times made was that the info in McCain’s piece was not new. Typical of the media, they completely lose sight of the needs of the public. How many non-Republicans have been closely following McCain until now? I, like many, have been too busy with the Dem primaries to look closely at his positions and would have liked to read his piece.
public@nytimes.com
This topic made me get down an old book, All the News That Fits,Herman H. Dinsmore, (1969). From the cover liner:
And on and on–the Korean War, the Viet Nam War–now Obama. No surprise. All part of the plan, whatever it is.
The NY Times is a disgrace to our country. The American people, New Yorkers, Kansans and all over our great nation deserve better than what they have to offer which is a one-sided freak show.
The Obama Freak Show starring Donna, Nancy, Howard the Coward and Me-chelle the most misunderstood elite woman in our country.
The NY Times can dry up and go to hell for all I care.
Ta-ta….
ks girl — there are so many disgraces I don’t know where to begin. Years from now when history is written. Someone will ask how is it so many normal intelligent people fell for this empty suit with no resume? Nancy Pelosi — who is at 14% approval has nothing better to do than castigate the Clinton Democrats. One would think she should be considering the American people with the price of oil so high — allowing the bill which would raise our current levels and cut prices to come to the floor for a vote. It seems that the party of the people has become of special interests. Nah couldn’t be. However, with all that on her plate the only problem Nancy has is Unity in a party which is totally split. Pelosi you are clueless althought we are honored to hold such a large place in your psyche.
The New York Times performed a public service by rejecting McCain’s Op-Ed. The story got much more positive coverage for McCain than his Op-Ed would have.
This is just stunning. Republican Presidential candidate John McCain is treated as if he is a graduate student trying to get his first magazine article published. “Gosh, John, we really would like to run something by you; but you’re going to have to make some changes. Tighten up your prose; state your conclusions in your subject paragraph, give us some exciting imagery that our readers can relate to. Then get back to us, okay?”
The fact that McCain has at least a 40% chance of being the most powerful person in the world; and that he has an absolute right, nay, duty, to tell us his ideas exactly as he has them, is obviously not the way the Times sees it. This has to go down as perhaps the most momentous piece of New Age journalistic sanctimony ever seen. Besides that, it is an absolute affront to the American voter, who doesn’t give a damn about the Times, except as it is supposed to provide information to them. “All the news that we think is appropriately styled the way Obama does it,” is now the new masthead.
William - I am so glad to see you post here. I’ve genuinely missed your thoughtful prose and insight you readily shared at TM.
It’s really nice to see your thoughts again.
Hey William. Will you be a guest writer here sometimes?
All newspapers have criteria they use to determine which submissions to publish in their op-ed section. Once McCain’s piece meets those criteria, it will be published.
If one takes the time to read the Time’s response, it is crystal clear they are not suggesting platform content but rather article content.
I suppose the NYT is part of the Obama conspiracy, even though they endorsed Clinton and McCain in the primaries…
You have to be kidding, right?
Ted a/k/a ObamaboTed,
You can go to hell too…
There’s plenty of room for all of you…
Oh horsecrap. Since when is “criteria” a dictatorial demand that you include something you are against and refuse to put on your platform.
Cut the crap.
When a newspaper enforces the line between political attacks by candidates and guest editorials. That’s when. If this were not done, a candidate could get a piece in the op-ed section every day, parroting the campaign line. They can do that, but they have to pay for the space.
What part of this are you having a hard time understanding? Mr. Shipley is not running for office and has no right to dictate what McCain wants to say about his own plan. Nor is he obligated to “mirror” Mr. Obama, whom he disagrees with. And he CERTAINLY is not obligated to give Mr. Shipley a “Timetable”. John McCain is entitled to a rebuttal to an Op Ed. In normal places this is a Given. But then again, this is the NY Times.
Kate Philips of the NYT says this:
“(In full disclosure, I worked as the deputy Op-Ed editor under Mr. Shipley during the mid-to-latter part of 2004, and it was policy then not to publish direct responses to Op-Ed columns already in print. Very rarely would a direct counterpoint to an Op-Ed be published; more often the response would be directed to Letters to the Editor. But dueling candidate Op-Eds sometimes rise to a different level, when they go beyond back-and-forth or standard talking points that everyone is familiar with.”
Which is what I said. A mere rebuttal does not meet the standard criteria. To be considered, a piece must lay out new information. Had McCain published first, Obama would have to meet the same criteria. That’s just life in the news print biz. Clearly a word apart from the blogosphere.
And I think you are misinterpreting the term “mirror”. He is saying the format should mirror Obama’s piece, ie include new information on policy. Clearly he is not saying the policy itself should mirror Obama’s.
Ted, try READING before posting your latest Obamapoint.
From the fucking article:
“It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama’s piece. To that end, the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq. It would also have to lay out a clear plan for achieving victory — with troops levels, timetables and measures for compelling the Iraqis to cooperate. And it would need to describe the Senator’s Afghanistan strategy, spelling out how it meshes with his Iraq plan,” Shipley wrote.
Now, look at the bolded section. Do you not see the word TIMETABLES in there? THAT WAS SHIPLEY’S COMMENT. SHIPLEY demanded that “timetables” be included in MCCAIN’S plan (if McCain wants his plan on the Times’ Op/Ed page).
Now, go back to Obama’s people and report you failed.
They told him they wouldn’t print his op-ed unless he offered a timetable. WTF?
No. This is just plain not true.
relative to troop withdrawal that is…
Candidate “parroting” the campaign line?
Stupidest thing I’ve ever heard.
How can one “parrot” one’s own position?
Speaking of “parroting” we have this link from a Obama fan going through his routine:
http://www.lightupload.com/video/animals/2279/This-Parrot-Is-Crazy-About-Obama.html
That human should be arrested for animal cruelty, not only for exposing the poor African gray to psychological torture and brainwashing but for mistreatment.
The poor thing has plucked out his breast feathers, a sign of boredom, inactivity and anxiety.
broke my heart. (I have parrots and none of them are pitiful straggly mangy birds).
If I knew where he lived I’d report him to ASPCA.
yes that is another angle; the parrot mimics the words of its master and no matter how much the master abuses the parrot, the bird keeps repeating his lines.
to parrot can mean to to repeat over and over, without change, like a parrot does.
Parroting means to imitate or mimic. Repetition isn’t a component.
I suppose the NYT is part of the Obama conspiracy, even though they endorsed Clinton and McCain in the primaries…
Well it obviously looks that way. That’s for stating it.
well if we go by Nagourney and the other A section pieces as the base, the research paper I did, coded for expressive verb usage, the Times DID use gender biased terms in their coverage of the campaign in the window I examined.
The AP and Reuters Handbooks for Journalism warn the writer NOT to use expressive verbs and list them, Nagourney and the NYT writers submitting under his byline use them expansively and repeatedly in describing Sen Clinton but not the male candidates, in the pieces I coded.
Now they are turning their bias against the latest opposition to their endgame of Uhhbama crowning…..repeated pieces on McCains citizenship status and NOTHING on Uhhbamas failure to provide even a COB??
yep, in the tank. blinded by their own frame and refuse to see it…
On the stock prices tanking as they make themselves even more irrelevant in an environment anathema to old school media, NYT, Tribune, same as GE, and TimeWarner, down down down: tsk tsk: karma chameleon dance now, W00T!!
What a great job they did endorsing Clinton, too. With friends like that, who needs enemies?
Ted, I DID read the entire response, and what part of dictating exactly what should be included in the McCain piece is not considered “content?” Go back to your vat of Kool Aid.
I’m a New Yorker, and I was an avid NY Times reader until February. After they endorsed Clinton, they went on a multi-month CDS jag that made it impossible to take the paper seriously. They lost all credibility continuing to print Maureen Dowd, Frank Rich & Bob Herbert’s relentless rants of Hillary hate. I could predict what was on the editorial page before I opened the paper. And the “news” copy wasn’t much better. Add to that the constant adoring photos of Obama on the front page, and I couldn’t even look at it anymore.
The Times is desperate to keep up with TV and the new media, so they have been increasingly sensationalizing the news. They sold out like the rest of the MSM.
It is about content. That is exactly my point. They are not telling McCain what to put in their platform, they are stating the content requirements for an op-ed piec in response to Obama’s.
Of course it isn’t about content. I agree with your first conclusion that the NYT is part of the Obama conspiracy.
The New York Times has NO right to demand a timetable from a candidate who refuses to have a timetable.
True. with respect to troop withdrawal.
Here’s the thing. Obama’s piece spelled out his plan. If McCain wants to rebut, he needs to lay out his plan. That’s all it comes down to. Sad fact is, McCain has no plan. Just wait for an undefined “victory” to occur and then maybe leave, maybe not. Seems to me everyone should object to that.
But hey, maybe I have it wrong. Maybe you can articulate for me McCain’s plan for Iraq. Maybe I just missed it.
Part of this is triggered by the fact McCain made his 100 year comment. And his “it does not matter” comment as to how long the troops stay in Iraq. He has opened himself up for criticism, and has not really responded. Other than “I know how to win wars”.
McCain should lay out his Iraq plan? Oh so Obama the Mack Daddy can
stealuse it huh?How many revisions did they ask obama for
ted — what makes Obama a great writer — I read parts of his book Dreams of My Father and it sounds like it was written by a 13 year old. But the media loves the little fraud who shoots hoops. They spent 2 hours shooting him wearing a pair of sunglasses.
Silly question, but related to this thread, what made his piece eligible for print was the fact he spelled out his stance on Iraq, he did not just attack his opponent.
what makes Obama a great writer — I read parts of his book Dreams of My Father and it sounds like it was written by a 13 year old
Great question. When you think about it, it is Obama’s maturity level so it does make sense his writings would be reflect that.
Well, Ted. Have you seen what McCain wrote? Maybe McCain wants a little give and take, like a debate on the issues, instead of writing content according to NYT.
Oh he spelled out his
Liesstance about Iraq. Gee, how’s he gonna backtrack on that one later?Obama didn’t write it. he has people doing that for him. I kind of think that John McCain’s camp has a whole shitload more experience writing OP EDs than Barack Obama has.
Let’s get to the nitty gritty here. The Times wants to tell McCain what his platform is.
This is not tenth grade. The Teacher doesn’t grade people’s platforms. We VOTE on them in a general election.
Obviously you are conditioned to accept the mind-rule of others, and have no desire to make decisions on your own. Clearly, you enjoy taking orders from others and dictating their plans, regardless of ethics. I recommend that you
try to reassert your self actualization, and personal growth by trying to develop your ability to reason for yourself.
To whom are you speaking to?
I challenged the mind-set of Ted’s blind acceptance of the judgment of a biased newspaper…
PUMA
Ted knows perfectly well the NYT was out of line. He’s just here to cause trouble. He needs his paycheck from Obama.
Ted, why are you defending them? We all know you support Obama, but what does that mean in terms of the actions of the NYT? Do you really want to hear from only one cantidate? Next time it may be your cantidate shut out. Unless you always agree with the NYT, in which case, did you agree with Judith Miller and the Bush lies she told before the invasion of Iraq?
He’s defending them because they get a tingle up their leg for Barack Obama.
Could you differentiate between platform content and article content? Don’t you think the requirement that McCain’s remarks “mirror” those of Obama is a bit controlling? If Obama is the one the Times designates to structure the dialog, perhaps they should prepare a questionnaire and just have McCain fill in the blanks.
Ted-Mack DaddyO’s pimp.
I want to add…we learned in the primary that the media can not be trusted to put the truth out to its readers or viewers… they (NYT) proved their bias today… I hope it has the same effect on voters in the GE as it did the primary…Hello President McCain!
30 year dem — its beginning to have the desired effect. Republicans are more anxious to go to the polls for McCain then had been thought possible a few months ago. There is nothing like getting people’s backs up to bring them to the polls.
Yes, there’s nothing like a little slapping from the biased media to motivate people.
The deja vu is simply astounding here. Barack Obama’s surrogates and sycophants will be his electoral demise.
What you are saying is that we have lost a lot of our freedoms. As I watch
Obama’s candidacy whittling away, more of our personal freedoms each day, I cannot help but wonder how anyone could vote for him, or for that matter
have faith in the biased system which has supported his overthrow of democracy.
I think it is time to launch a class action suit against the 3 mainstream networks regarding them being an adjunct of the obama campaign team. perhaps a figure of 30 BILLION DOLLARS PER NETWORK ! to fund equal coverage of Mcain! there are laws on the books that MANDATE EQUAL TIME FOR EACH MAINSTREAM CANDIDATE!They have each given OBAMA AT least 5-10 BILLION DOLLARS OF FREE CHOREOGRAPHED ADVERTISING for Obama! CLEARLY BREAKING THE LAW ! regarding equal time statutes! if Mcain had to purchase an equal amount of coverage on PRIME TIME NEWS HOURS it would cost AT LEAST 10 BILLION DOLLARS! This OUTRAGIOUS ADVOCACY COVERAGE WHICH HAS DONE IN HILLARY CLINTON , AND NOW TARGETS MCAIN HAS TO BE PUNISHED FORCEFULLY! Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic nominee with out this extreme bias! they are all acting like PRAVDA COVERING BREZHNEV IN SOVIET TIMES THE WAY THEY “COVER” Obama’s campaign!
LET’S SUE THEIR ASSES OFF! NOW!
Is this true, because there was a post here recently of a graph done by an independent media watch dog agency that clearly showed the overwhelming positive coverage of Obama vs. any other candidate. Check the archives–it was recent.
Yes, true
When does the new FISA law go into effect? One of the statutes says that any show that presents one point of view can be sued by those with opposing views if they’re not offered equal coverage.
I heard about it mostly with respect to talk radio but wouldn’t it also apply to MSM?
Seriously.
G.E., “We bring good things to life,” is the 7th largest commercial bank in the country, in health “care,” in the media, and a defense contractor. They supported Bush, the war in Iraq, and now Obama. Lots of our tax dollars are going down all the holes mentioned above.
Today Jeffry Immelt was on his network announcing a new fund created between GE and Abu Dhabi. They’re investing in things like clean energy - which we can’t afford to help America invest in, just as we can’t afford health care. He mentioned an interest in Africa, which must be the new frontier for the ruling class. The International President will come in handy for this new venture.
I think it is time to launch a class action suit against the 3 mainstream networks regarding them being an adjunct of the obama campaign team. perhaps a figure of 30 BILLION DOLLARS PER NETWORK ! to fund equal coverage of Mcain! there are laws on the books that MANDATE EQUAL TIME FOR EACH MAINSTREAM CANDIDATE!They have each given OBAMA AT least 5-10 BILLION DOLLARS OF FREE CHOREOGRAPHED ADVERTISING for Obama! CLEARLY BREAKING THE LAW ! regarding equal time statutes! if Mcain had to purchase an equal amount of coverage on PRIME TIME NEWS HOURS it would cost AT LEAST 10 BILLION DOLLARS! This OUTRAGIOUS ADVOCACY COVERAGE WHICH HAS DONE IN HILLARY CLINTON , AND NOW TARGETS MCAIN HAS TO BE PUNISHED FORCEFULLY! Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic nominee with out this extreme bias! they are all acting like PRAVDA COVERING BREZHNEV IN SOVIET TIMES THE WAY THEY “COVER” Obama’s campaign!
LET’S SUE THEIR ASSES OFF! NOW! HILLARY ‘08!!
See? You’re so upset your keyboard is stuttering!
lol.
Mmmm… What’s next to be expected from Nuts Yet-again Times?
The old gray lady has turned black.
The Gray Lady is senile and her black nanny is stealing money from her purse to give to Obama.
Nah, she turned red. Rolex Commies.
Boycott the biased media. Permanently.
It would be more effective to boycott each channel’s biggest sponsors.
By the way,WHO is barak obama? Where was he born? How many dual citizenships does he have? does he even HAVE a U.S. BIRTH CERTIFICATE?? THE MSM is trying to stuff this pretender to the throne down our throat like we are gooses ready for pate!
The truth is, Obama is the Son of God and he can’t produce a birth certificate because it would blow his cover.
lol. Now you’ve let the cat out of the bag.
Obama and his minions have declared war on democracy. Hillary was the first victim. If he manages to get the nomination, McCain May be the next.
We may be to be forced to accept him whether we want to or not.
This is not an election it is a coronation.
One cannot help but wonder, who really owns America, with the likes of
Obama being force fed to the public
ally — all I know about Obama is that he wears nice sunglasses. They used to be known as the news media but I guess news is not whats happening. This country is going into a Depression and they push this amateur 24/7 they all suck except Fox.
I have conservative Republican friends who have sent me email for years —
So lately I’ve been sending information and links about BOBO’s phony birth certificate — and I’ve asked my friends to send my email to their friends — and so on and so on. I am so glad I never shut down that information flow from my friends — because now we are on the same page — we see BOBO as a national Security threat and just plain evil.
I think my conservative friends would love to know about this latest garbage from the NYT.
PUMA
Not just that, don’t forget PASSPORT-GATE. Remember that passport files were breached and everyone jumped on Hillary, but it turned out to be … employees of a company owned by a campaign official of OBAMA. Hm … what would a passport have on it that Obama wouldnt’ want us to see?
I thought of that too. Many times since the birth certificate questions came up.
He was indignant and at the time I thought, whomever rifled those files was only interested in the information of ONE of the candidates but made it look like they cruised all three.
Then we find out that the people who did it are tied to Obama’s paid consultant.
It’s the Corporate Media at work. The same Corporate owned Media the so-called left/progressives claimed to despise all of these years.
Now that they support Obama, Corporate media millionaire and billionaire support is okay.
Just like FISA. As soon as Obama voted for it the bill wasn’t so bad.
I suspect Obama could vote for anything at this point. It’s okay because Obama is The One that will bring world peace.
This kind of adoration is normally reserved for religious leaders. Heck, even Gandhi and MLK had their critics.
I support candidates. But I don’t look to them for world peace or personal salvation.
Obama was caught meeting with all those “evil” industrial tycoons too. He says one thing, does another, and then says you were mistaken about what he said.
I hate that about Obama the Mack Daddy. Despise it. And he is beginning to get in trouble for this behavior. Foreign leaders are beginning to complain about this maneuvering that Mack Daddy does.
I don’t know where to post this and it is off this topic, but Taylor Marsh just posted a blog entry that throws Hillary Clinton under the bus so they can diss PUMA.
And if anyone tries to point out the hipocrisy of Taylor Marsh…it’s “buh Byeeeee!!!”
Taylor Marsh is a nut case — ignore her.
She will soon pass into oblivion — and be ignored. She made her bed . . .
Obama is evil and a crooked Chicago politician — if she hasn’t scrubbed her website — at one time she did an adequate job of focusing on just who Obama is. I do thank her for that — but her flip flop means that anything she says from here on out is questionable.
Taylor Marsh is a “distraction”. I only met her for about 20 minutes back in April.
I miss Reverend Wright and his teachings. Its been a long time since I’ve had a bird’s eye view on the status of America and our policymakers.
Your boy is doing a phenomenal JOb.
Taylor Marsh was in the tank for Mack DaddyO but pretended she was for Clinton. She banned me for using his middle name way before the primaries ended. She didn’t allow us to say his middle name Hussein. She’s crazy. Barry Mohammed Hussein Dunham-Soetoro-Obama..there-I said it.