Skip33666: Barack Obama and I Had an Affair for 14 Years, and I Know He Should Not Be Presidentg

Hacker Boy (hacking into this disgraceful blog again in the interest of truth, justice and teh American way, despite Skip's attempt to smear me as an agent of Rupter Murdoch--Skip disgracefully using the publicity about the hacking by a Murdoch operation in Britain to lend "credibility" to his attempt to smear me, and intimidate me into ceasing this public interest hacking into this despicable blog): "Skip. You have again outdone yourself, just when everyone said it could not be done--that you had lied and distorted beynd any possibility of getting any worse. You know that headline is absurd. You are a 64 year old white MAN (if we can believe you). I doubt if you have ever even spoken to Barack Obama. Yet, you are claiming to have had anAFFAIR (note te, Skip, the use of your all caps device for emphasis) with Barack Obama. You are despicable . Does the Secret Service know about you? And what makes YOOU (all caps again) qualified to say whether Barack Obama should be President of teh United States."


Skip: I am glad that Hacker Boyo is literate enough to quote Daffy Duck ("you are despicable"). Okay, I agree taht it is somewhat unlikely that Obama would have had an affair with me, although in today's society not impossible. I have to admit that I have never actually taked to Barack Obama, and that our "afair" is totally of the mind. However, I will probably be releasing 50 text messages we have exchanged, as soon as I can compose them. Of course, I do say that Barack Obama should not be Preisdent of the United States. And I am more qualified to say that than Ginger White, whose opinion on the subject is all over the media (including the unfair and unbalanced network, which you should be boycotting; See the next article on Cavuto and teh DISGRACEFUL questions he asked Herman Cain). I was high school valedictorian, graduated with high honors from New Mexico State University with a degree in physics (mathematics minor), and graduated with high honors from the Unitversity of Texas School of Law. then I was an attorney in Texas for some 35 years. It is true taht I never declared bankruptcy, or got sued for libel, like Ms. White (assuming I got this name right, as I am not at all interested in her name), who is Cain's accuser. I actuallyl think that I AM "qualified' to evaluate whether Barack Obama should be President of the United States, but you may think (kike my mother) that is just proof of an insane ego rivialling Bill O'Reilly and Obama himself. Again, that is not the point. It is ABSUD to suggest that Ginger White's opinion on Herman Cain is RELEVANT to whether Herman Cain should be President. In fact, it is ABSURD to suggest taht Giner White's opinioin is "news'. It is a SMEAR by incommpetnt EVIL people (taling "journalists" here, and not some "conspiracy" behind Ms. White).


If I were a woman, and had written the above headline about Herman Cain, I would be "news" (assuming I could at least show I had ever met Herman Cain, although I am geting less and less sure that even that is necesssary for today's EVIL "journalist" out to SMEAR a conservative/GOP politician.). That is the reason for the headline, and this article. We are creating an EVIL society, where "back fence" gossip is acceptable so long as the victim (Herman Cain, for example) is somone regarded as an "acceptable" target. I have said that I belive "jounalists" are now the most despicable people alive, only accepting serial killers and terrorists. I have changed my mind. They are WORSE than serial killers and terrorists, and I think the pubic about rnks them that way. The public, in this case, is DEAD ON CORRECT. In saying this, I am mainly using the standarsds set by mainstream media "journliasts", who ranked George W. Bush as far worse than terrorists, and often seem to be ranking the United States of America as worse than terrorists and terrorist states. But we are talking here "moral blame". Serial killers and terrrorists are distrubed individuals. It is ture that they may not have the disadvantage of a "libveral" eduction, but serial killers and terrorists may have EXCUUSES (or at least reasons) for their mental derangement. "Journlaists' have no excuse (generally), and no acceptable reasons. Even when it is pointed out what they are doing, they still not only keep on doing it, but WHINE and try to "justify" themselves. There are no worse lpeole on this planet, and I no longer exclude serial killers and terrorists (in general, taking into account all of teh factors that go into "moral blame"). The peoiple of the unfair and unbalanced network are included in this evaluation of "journalists", as this blog has shwon over months and years. I worry that I am holding back here, and not saying what I mean. Let me summarize it this way: I hae more contempt for "journalists" than I have for any other human beings on this planet, with only a very few exceptioins. I think better of my fellow citizens that I am not alone here, just as their opinion of Congress shows that I am not alone there either (so long as they do not fall for the EVOIL "journalist" assertion that all we need is "compromise", and everythng will be fine, especailly if all of those conservatives out there would learn to give uyp their principles and adopt the "principes' that the "journalists" know are right).


I repeat: It is a LIE to assert that the OPINION of Ginger White, on Heman Cain or anybody else, is relevant (much less "news'). The opinion of the ordinary man on the street is worth at least as much. This (this putting forth of he OPINION as being relevant to anyting) is enough to CONVICT "journalists" of both "journalistic" malpractice and of being EVIL people SPREADIG EVIL. And I do not mean this as hyperbole. It is an absolute fact. The media is in the process of turning our electins into a "contest" of BACK FENCE GOSSIP, and that is one of the things that may ultiimately destory this coutnry (agian, not meant at all as hyperbole).


Look at where we are. Bill Clinton had MULTIPLE "affirs"--including in the Oval Office as President, and BEFORE running for Preisdent. There were TAPES (Jeffifer Flowes). Now I gagged on the sex with an INTERN (Penn State , anyone?--even if she were technically an adullt) in the Oval Office. But I actualy thought that Bill Clinton's affairs were irrelevant. The media agreed then, and then dismissed MULTIPLE calims of "sexual harrassment" against Bill Clinton as to conduct both before and after he became President. Contrast that with how the media has treated Herman Cain--to NO GOP or "conservative" defense, because those "movers and shakers" don't think Herman Cain can defeat Brack Obama and wanted to get rid of him. That is not to mentin the RACISM here, and the attmempt to trade on that old "fear" of black men an dwhite women (dating all of the way back to before the Civil War).


Again, look at where our society now is . A lefitst Democrat MAY get awaywith dismissing aattacks on him or her, IF the "attacker" is someone like Ginger White (or can be made to appear that way with character assassination) . But if youi are a conservative, or a member of teh GOP, ANY woman can "come forward" and make "accusations". And the "accusations" alone--even as to pretty tame stuff--are supposed to be enough to KILL a campaign. You know the dril here. It is the DISTRACTION. ow can Herman Cain keep going, with the constant DISATRACTION of all of these "charges" (a "distraction" created totally by the EVIL media peope themselves). I do think the media has destroyed Cain's campaign, absent a miracle, because Cain did not come out SwINGING (making the media the isssue, and pretty much ignoring the "chrages"). But all of this obscures the EVIL here, which is putting our Preisdential elections into the hands of SMEAR MERCHANTS. Again, I am NOT talking aobut a "conspiracy" here.--at least not in "instigatig" directly the women to come forward. I am talking about the MEDIA, who are ENCOURAGING any person out thre who wants her 15 minutes of fame to make "allegations" against Herman Cain (or any conservative). And the "allegations' are thnen supposed to be enough to sink the campaign, whether or not they can be proven to be true. I epeart: This is EVIL stuff advanced by EVIL pep[;e (I have long ago named names at CNN, as well as elsewhere in the media). Agia, it is these "journalists' who are the SMEAR MERCHANTS: the EVIL people I am tlaking aobut. The people who come forward and the people who may institagate them, are only doing what the EVIL people in the media are INVITING them to do.


"Skip, you can't possibliy be saying that the media should IGNORE these allegations, even if you consider them smears." Oh, but I do, if they were real "journalists" (instead of EViL people with an agenda). No, it is NOT relevant whether Herman Cain had an "affair". Worse, it opens our political campaigns up to being SORDID exercises in back fence gossip, which wer are promoting to be the main "issue'" in the campaign. As I have said before: Waht is the REAL reason adultery should not be a crime? Nope, it is NOT because "sex" should not be criminal. It IS because we should NOT be looking in people's bedrooms to ferret out this 'crime". But even that is not rally it. Who gets "charged" with adultery? Righ: Either the very unlucky or the peole who the authorites want to GET for some reason (or someone else wants to "get"). That is exactly what is happening here. The media is encouraging people to come forward against CONSERVATIVES. And it is often impossible to "prove' what has happened, as the MEDIA "looks into people's bedrooms" (albeit vicariously). Thus, anyone UNLUCKY enough to have mere ALLEGATIONS made faces a Herculean task, especailly if he or she is a TARGET of teh mainstream media (including the unfair and unbalanced network). No, I don't think Newt Gingrich's lurid past has anything to do with whether he should be President (where I oppose him on more substantive grounds), and I don't think that the LESS LURID allegations (not even at all proven) against Cain have anything to do with whether he should be President. As to what I think about Ms. Whitel's OPINION of Herman Cain, and its "relevance", that is not even printable. It DOES NOT MATTER whether this stuff is mainly true, half ture, or mostly not ture. The mere attempt to "investigate" that, spllalshing the "allegations" all oover the "news', is an EVIL, SORDID thing. The most you can say is that it "tests" whether a candidate like Cain can "stand up" to this kind of EviL attack, adn that Cain has pretty much failed that test (as I think arguably he has, but NOt because the "allegations" have been relevant). But this is EVIL in itself, because it ENABLES evil. If we are going to say taht EVIL attacks are okay if a candidate is unable to stand up under them, but cracks or is unable to meet the evil head on, then we are merely rafifying the EVIL. I refuse to do that. Thus, this blgo maintains its endorsement of Hrman Cain, even though my best opinion is that theEVIL LSMEAR MERCHANTS of teh media have done Cain in (thus encouraing them to keep making our political campaigns about this SORDID, irrelevant back street gossip).


Oh. You say you want "better" people to run for office? Why should they. 50% of American men, or more, have committed adultery (if you believe the "surveys"). That eliminates 50% of potential male candidates right there. 100% of American men CAN be "alleged" to hae conducted "sexual harrassment". Especially for conservatives, that basically eliminates ALL male candidates, except the most bland. And we have not yet evn scrachted the surface of possible SMEARS. CNN, and the mainstream media, SMEARED Newt Gingrich over a FIFFANY'S CREDIT ACCXOUNT. Thye went so far as to suggest it pretty much disqualified him from being Preisdent. That is ABUSRD. It is EVIL stuff. CNN is STILL trying to SMEAR Mitt Romney over being Mormon (see plannedblog article). Illnness? Psychiatirc treatment? Marital problems (not even involving adultery, but where a wife has accused a husband of things--as with Jeri Ryan in Illinois some years back)? The liest just goes on and on. If you are a lefitst Democarat, the mainstream media will IGNORE the "smear" (as it did with Sean Hannity's attempted smears of Barack Obama, which were MORE relevant than what has been alleged against Herman Cain, and as they did with regard to the Reverend Wright matter). The e mainstream media continues to ignore, when it is not ATTACkING, the allegatin taht Barack Obama is not really a Christian (as Bill Maher and I agree he is not). But what if a CONSRVATIVE ever left God out of the Declaration of Independence, or accused small town Americans of "clinging to their religion". Or what if Sarah Palin once belonged to a church that is known for "speaking in tongues", wich most Americans might regard as not a "real" Christian religon (more of a cult, like the media likes to assert, by proxy, with regard to Romney).? Right. THEN the media will start "investigating" the DETAILS of a persons' relition, as CNN did with an article entitled 'The Gospel According to Herman Cainn."


These people ("journalists") are the worst hypocrites to ever walk the Earth, on two legs or four. They are EVIL people spreading evil. I have no respect for them at all. I wish they knew enough about me to make the feeling mutual,. Maybe some day.


P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight).