Hacker Boy (hacking into this disgracefu blog in the interest of truth, and still denying Skip's absurd that I am Piers Morgan, or someone else who learned hacking in Rupert Murdoch's media empire); "Skip. you call everyone a liar. I even hear rumors that yu are about to attack John Boehner and Mitt Romney. Yet, yu tell the most outrageous lies yourself. Yuo know very well that James Carville did not say taht Obama was going to lose in November."
Skip: "Hacker Boy is, as susual, half right, while being totally and fndamentally wrong. And I am more and more certain that he is the disgraceful Piers Morgan, who even my 89 year old motehr (without any propting from me) can't stand, asking: "Have yu seen that British guy on CNN? Why do they have him on? Can't they find anyone here at least better than THAT." I can't adequately express the utter contempt and disgust she put into the word "that".
James Carville and I (see previous articles this week) agreee that President Obama LIED about this oppostion to same sex marriage in the 2008 campaign. On CNN, Carville said that Obama's statements in the 2008 campaign were noting but POLITICS, and theat Obama has ALWAYS favored gay marriage. Carville, of course, did not use the word 'lie", but what else do you call it when Obama--simply to get votes--misrepresented his real positon on gay marriage in the 2008 campaign, and only now gave his real positon because of POLITICAL DAMAGE CONTROL forced upon him by Joe Biden. Sure, I like the repeat this TRUTH that this blog has told you abut for more than 4 years--before Obama finally came out with the support of gay marriage that represented his real posiion all along. But the specific reson I mentin this againi sthat this same CNN interview was prompted by a CARvILLE ARTICLE saying that Obama supporters should watch out: Obama faces an uphill battle in November based on the message beng sent to politicians in the U.S. and AROUND LTHE WORLD: INCUMBENTS LOSE. Carville's point was that Obama is fighting against this tide, and that his supporters are way too complacent about their chances of winning in November.
Oh. Hacker Boy is right, in that Carville never really said that Obama wuould "lose" . But how else can you interpret what Carville said other than as agreement with this blog: "Unless something CHANGES--either the economy or major mistakes in the Romney campaign--Obama is running against the anti-incumbent TIDE running strong in the U.S. and almost everywhere in the world. Carville--a political oerative on Obama's side--is NEVER gong to PREDICT that Obama is gong to lose. However, how can you interpret what Carvilles said other than a PLEA for Obama to do soemthing GAME CHANGING, bec ause otherwise Obama is headed for DEFEAT?
I stand by this headline. Carville and The Maverick Conservative agree, in everything but semantics, about the uphill battle that Obama is facing. Obama is running against the tide of history, as McCain was in 2008, and he is gong to have to do MORE than "politics as usual" to pull out a victory.
P.S. No proofreading or spell checkng (baD eyesight).