What makes you think it was a criticism of McCain that got you banned? Tell, what's the comment that you think got you banned? I don't know why having questions for and about Barack and wondering what he'd do if elected, and not being sure (is anyone sure?) means you can't say something unkind about John. It's not pro-John site, it's a pro reform site, meant to influence in the direction of accountability and clarity. It's a site for those who wish Hillary were our candidate, and who want to influence Barack to be more like her, to the extent possible. We also want a fair and conventional convention, so that it's possible she could win it, even if that possibility is so remote as to make it quite unlikely. Possible is all that's asked, not plausible.
I'd like unity, and for me that means playing by the rules the way they were when the 'game' started. If it's fair, that will bring most of us behind Barack. If it isn't fair, that may make reform of the party more important for some than who wins.
Republican sites don't allow any criticism of McCain.
I will donate 50$ to your candidate if you find one diary that focusses attack on your candidate John McCain.
you have to go to the blogs that are focused on beating pugs, there you'll find many. If you go to a blog that is trying to reform the Democratic Party, you won't find diaries about McCain, either for or against him.
there is a report now, on how both Barack and John have followed Hillary, Barack presenting himself as inevitable and leaderly, John complaining about how the media is only interested in Barack and is ignoring him, and McCain running on experience. Too bad for him that it's the wrong experience.
One thing still is clear, with both it's not about issues.
meanwhile my girl is back in the Senate, working, and speaking about issues. That's one place, specific plans, and proposed solutions, where neither is following her in. But, there is still time. She may not be a presidential contender, but she's still a role model.
But that can't be, because there are lots of diaries in support of McCain. So there should be one critical of him as well, right?
I found two in support of McCain, at least in the past week and a half:
http://alegrescorner.soapblox.net/showDi ary.do?diaryId=297 About how women over 65 previously supported Democrats, but now they're supporting McCain. This is because they intuitively know that they can trust McCain.
http://alegrescorner.soapblox.net/showDi ary.do?diaryId=246 This one is much more straightforward. In a contest between Obama and McCain, McCain is the only viable choice. This one was actually frontpaged by site admins.
Anna Shane is either lying or doesn't know about her own website.
She's not lying as we would think of it.
If you study abhorant brain patterns, they actually can look at something RED and think it's blue.
She actually THINKS they are all about celebrating Hillary and womens issue, but, as you say, 90% of it is smearing Obama.
And, think about this?
This statement is the LITERAL defination of cognotive dissonace:
"I am a feminist, and because of the sexist treatment Hillary Clinton recieved, I am going to vote for the party that literally has codified women as second class citizens in their platform for 3 decades"
This is like "My mom died of lung cancer from smoking, so I am sending the money she left me to the tabacco defense fund"
the first link you put up is not pro-McLame at all, it does discuss a POLL that seems to show that result but it does not glorify McSame and in fact goes on to say how he is "coy" about how he would "fix" SS and talks about Obama's actual plan for it.
The 2nd one is more anti-BHO then pro-John although the difference is not enough to say your characterization is wrong.
But it does show that you are not really reading the diaries before you post links, just the headlines.
I'll match that. By the way, we can read and we know what it is.
Count me in for $50 too. All you need to do is cite a single one.
to constantly fly the flag of free speech and then ban anyone with a singular thought out of lockstep with their own (on their own sites), is just shameful.
Whether banning them for criticising McCain or merely respectfully disagreeing with their POV--the hypocrisy has been well established.
I don't suspect anyone will "come around" to supporting Obama when they wallow in the mire of constant hysterical attacks on our nominee. Hell, if that was the only viewpoint I were able to access to I'd probably start believing that Obama was the comic book villain the PUMA's make him to be. Anyone who paints the world in such vivid extremes is bound to be wrong. The truth is rarely is good and evil to be found in this world, usually just some nebulous shade of gray.
How about it, Anna? One diary with a criticism of McCain as its focus. Shouldn't be hard to find, I mean, it's a Democratic site, right?
The rules as they were were fine when Hillary Clinton was inevitable. Obama played by the rules as they were and won fair and square. Let this meme rest for god's sake.
Oh please. We can see what's over there. It's just an anti-Obama hate site, nothing more.
