Maybe now the liberal media might actually start taking a real look at Obama instead of slobbering all over his "candidacy". Maybe they might actually look into his record and find out that he has accomplished nothing in his "career". Being an eloquent speaker means nothing if you haven't got anything to back it up with. I am looking forward to the McCain/Obama debates where we will see that if you take Obama's prepared speeches away from him he immediately begins to flounder around, not sure of what he should say. This is the "change" I am seeking. The media changing and actually reporting unbiased news is a lot to ask, I know. The media actually treating both candidates equally is "change" I would like to see but know I won't. We'll never see the media admit Obama is an empty suit. The truth would hurt them too much.

Get over it.All McCain has going for him is the presumption that he is a "war hero".This election is going to be about change,not a continuation of the failed Bush policies,both foreign and domestic.

hell out of me is the shock [the shocked reaction I say] of the news media as we move into the general election and they somehow suddenly 'discover' things about Obama that Hillary supporters already know, but that the news media had not seen fit [mysteriously so] to examine.

Obamacrats had better pray that the blatant press bias for Obama carries over into the general election [traditionally, however, the press favors the republican candidate] because if the press does mysteriously awaken to the huge negatives in Obama's background then the Obama campaign is sunk.

For a junior senator (not exactly a great position to get things done in DC), Obama's accompllishments are fairly impressive actually. Working with Richard Lugar to get control of loose nuclear material, for example.

This no doubt contrasts with your accomplishment-free existence.

Can you please detail the huge negatives in Obama's background? Thank you.

I'm going to keep pointing this out. The independent PEW research center has completed an extensive study of bias in the media thus far, and guess what? They treated Obama much more harshly than Clinton.

As far as the McCain/Obama debates, do you think Hillary was some slouch in their 20 debates? I think she did pretty well, far better in fact than McCain possibly can. I can't wait to see these two together either.

Oops, forgot the link.

Can you please detail the accomplishments of our current President before he took office? It could be my memory but I don't recall anything stellar in his "career". To borrow from you: Being the son of a former President means nothing if you haven't got anything to back it up with. If we look back over the last 20 years, we can see that a lot of former Presidents didn't have much in the way of major accomplishment before they took office.

I think what your post shows is that it is not so much about Obama's record or Obama's experience, as it is about voters for other candidates not knowing. They haven't caught up yet. Obama supporters already know where he stands and have compared them. Now that he is the candidate, I suspect that part will be resolved because Hillary supporters will become more familiar with his stances as a whole.

Obama called an empty suit, and Obama thought to have no track record is folly. His task is going to be tough if people just project that they don't know the issues stances, therefore he has none. Somehow he is going to have to get the reord out there. The record itself is impressive if not perfectly aligned with every single stand any individual takes.

This isn't a contest between Bush and Obama. It's between Bush and McCain now. That's the two to compare.

The big thing is that Obama says he's all about change. Ok, he changed a few things for a small part of Chicago when he was a state senator here. He's done nothing else here in Illinois. If he can't do it here, then what pray tell can he "change" in Washington with the big guys? If he's really all about change, then show it what he's changed.

You can't really compare the achievements of any legislature to an executive. Your complaint would hold more water if he had been mayor or governor (and man we have to throw those two bums out).

I see your point blueshift.

But do must companies take a junior person and move him up the CEO after only a few years? That's probably a rare occurance, but not unheard of. The board of directors and shareholders want to see a proven track record of success and how he/she's overcome hurdles specifically like the ones the CEO job will expose. The voters of America might do well to ask the same of Obama. Is his experience deep enough and relevant enough compared to McCain? Not compared to Bush or Kennedy or whomever from the past. Just compared to the only other viable alternative today.

I can see how someone with his enthusiasm and messiah like qualities can be very invigorating to the whole country. I am not sure that he can deliver what he's promising- change on almost every issue that concerns America. I don't think either candidate will have anything but a difficult time regardless. Obama seems to promise the moon, though, so there's going to be dissappointment for most.

Maybe now the liberal media might actually start taking a real look at Obama instead of slobbering all over his "candidacy".

Little chance of that, it's largely their doing that Obama has been promoted far beyond his competence (the infamous "Peter Principle") plus, the liberal rules of Political Correctness to which the mainstream media clings forbid any criticism of any person of the black persuasion. Obama's MSM free pass will continue, but unfortunately for him, other sources (the web, the RNC) do not adhere to the tenets of affirmative action and will apply genuine scrutiny to the junior senator. Under such scrutiny Obama will wither like an ant under a magnifying glass in the August sun.

Maybe they might actually look into his record and find out that he has accomplished nothing in his "career".

Sure he's accomplished some stuff:

• Obama undermined the 2nd amendment rights of the people of Chicago and Illinois, disarming law abiding citizens, leaving them at the mercy of gang thugs and creating one of the most violent and crime-ridden cities in America.
• Obama opposed laws to prosecute gang members accused of murder, he feels that criminials have more rights than their victims.
• Obama introduced Senate bill 2243, which would subvert American soverignty to UN rules called the "Millenium Declaration." This would allow forces with the UN such as Syria, Iran, and Sudan to legally disarm the US, and allowing the UN to "tax" the population of America (take your money) without limitation.
  

Sad and disgusting milestones, but accomplishments nonetheless.

Wow. Straight out of the Republican handbook. These myths have already been debunked, though.

ever does "mysteriously awaken to the huge negatives in Obama's background." A very large IF, my old friend, indeed.

Especially since I have every (sad) confidence in them that they will IGNORE whatever else may come out. Velcro Obama will somehow manage to duck it, am sure.His free ride will continue, my guess.

He's the anointed One, G., and it's going to take more than a big-mouth renegade Catholic priest from SW Chicago to sink Obama's ship. I do rather wish that the elitist overly Liberal MSM (**) would have found a different way to exorcise their case of LongTerm White Liberal Guilt.

(**) OMG, listen to me, I sound like Jack Dallas or Todd - kazillions, or something. :-)

Be well.