Why has the media turned so negative on Obama and is virtually silent on the numerous flaws of Hillary. As an example, Obama has been tried, convicted and damned by his guilt by association. How about the other candidates? Hillary first, his primary rival at this stage. Her biggest supporter is her husband Bill Clinton, who spent most of his life sexually using and abusing women, including Monica who was only few years older than his own daughter. He lied about it, told the whole world, wagging his finger and said that “I never had sexual relationship with that woman…” may not be the exact words. What did Hillary do she not only stood by him, again and again, but actively participated in demonising women, including Monica, who was then only few years older than her daughter. Now she is champion of women? What baloney. Bill Clinton was then impeached by the house but his ass was saved in the senate. Bill Clinton pardoned several scumbags including, two Weatherman terrorists, and Marc Rich, a fugitive from justice. There were only few of the many other sordid affairs during his presidency. The country was in turmoil and will be again if Hillary is to return to the Whitehouse. You think Bill will change his way, no way in Hell. Like Brian had said one time, a whore is a whore, she can’t help herself. Let us take John McCain, he was right when he said during a previous election cycle, and that extreme religion has no place in the political process whether on the left or right. During this election cycle he has gone out of his way to seek support of and embraced the very right wing religious zealots he had previously criticised so vehemently. More important he is married to war mongering that has financially drained United States, with almost half a million casualties (dead, injured and displaced) destruction of a country that posed no threat to United States or others. Husain was an evil man and had a big mouth but was contained. The war was unnecessary. Now McCain wants to repeat the same mistake in Iran … remember what he mused the other day when asked about Iran “Bomb bomb bomb”. Joe Liebermann who has been clamouring for attacking Iran is his soul mate. When the Iraq war started you will recall the oil was slightly below $30 and the Bush people were predicting that it will be under $20 with US control or influence leading to increased production. Well the oil is not $110, partly because of dramatic fall of US dollar, and fear premium. Imagine what the Oil will be if Iran was to be attacked. There will be other consequences that could be far more serious than the price of oil. Getting back to Hillary, she is far more dangerous in her thinking. Her recent musings over Middle East have not received any attention in the press that is concerned of trivial things. One is that she seems to have implied that US will massively retaliate one of the countries in the Middle East was to be attacked. Second, she said US would, not clear under what circumstances, in halite Iran. Is she saying all this to get votes or she means it? She recently called McCain as McBush. The way she has been behaving one could say is HillBilly. Hillary, who began her path to public prominence and power; it was by humiliating a black Republican, Senator Brooke of Massachusetts, turning on him in her student commencement speech, the first of its kind in Wellesley, in 1969. She made this soft-spoken, elegant Senator seem like a running-dog-of-imperialism for the old establishment. He was nonplussed and had no real choice in the moment but to be her rhetorical punching bag. Now fate has come full circle, and she has surmounted every obstacle to come within real striking distance of the top prize, her party’s candidacy for President of the United States. Yet just when she arrived, when victory was in her grasp, when she was positioned to bring to a crescendo all the notes and chords of her life’s symphony, along comes one man to snuff out her dream. She is shooting blanks, has no ammunition, her resources will dry out soon, and so will be any influence she or her husband left. That will be a good thing for the country that has seen enough of the Clintons. Too bad for the Media that will not have them to kick them around.

"Why has the media turned so negative on Obama and is virtually silent on the numerous flaws of Hillary."

You have to understand the behavior of the mainstream media beasts (medium mainstreamus). First and foremost, they are herd animals. Being cowardly by nature, they seek safety in numbers. So they act as a unit. But the herd has no leader to enforce discipline or consistency. This makes the behavior of the herd erratic and difficult to predict.

Second, the herd feeds on stories. But through an ingenious evolutionary adaptation the herd can use small stories to generate bigger stories to feed on. This seeming violation of the Laws of Thermodynamics is not understood by scientists. But it gives the media beasts the ability to greatly amplify small stories way out of their original proportion. This is the key to their behavior.

So in the case of Barack Obama, the media beasts started with the small story that Hillary Clinton's negative campaigning was damaging Obama. That story can't sustain the media herd. But after amplifying the story out of all proportion, the media beasts ended up reporting that Obama was unelectible. Now that's a story that the media herd can feed on!

Obama 08!