Cindy McCain stole drugs from her own charity to sell to make money for her heroine and cocaine addiction! Then she got off without any charges even though she committed a FELONY!

Has Michelle Obama ever committed a felony?
I didn’t think so, so shut up already!
You people are carrying on and inventing situations because of a comment that NEVER happened!

How low does Cindy have to go before you object to this type of behavior?

You people are so scared of losing power that you have thrown truth and character out the window!

In my experience, most bloggers are content to merely quote other bloggers, which makes fact-checking nearly impossible, and in any case most blog posts are opinion pieces. At least neo has some sources (albeit selectively cherry-picked for content.)

Wow. OK, well, if it makes you feel better to dismiss the concerns of people that have faced true bigotry, exterminationist rhetoric and deeds, and racism their whole lives, because, hey, some black folks really do call us whitey, well, then, the Republican party is probably the right place for you. Of course, I do note that all of these accusation are made by inference. Not by anything the candidate or his wife said, but by what people like you infer they meant by what they said. Amazing.

That Rev. Wright business is priceless, though. In all the whining and kvetching about his “intolerance”, his “poisonous” speech, his “hatefulness”, etc., there is always a pair of items missing. A rebuttal of his argument, or any effort on his or his former congregations’s part to adopt a separatist stance. I wonder why that is?

Fair enough, and thank you for a considerate reply.

The bloggers I’ve read on both (all?) sides don’t seem to deal much in primary sources, which I find frustrating given that a lot of key material is readily accessible on the internet. (The MSM hasn’t been much better, either, and has sometimes been worse.) However, I have learned to enjoy blogs (and MSM) as much for entertainment as for information. That is why I have no problem when people like you and Sally want to get into flame wars with each other. Watching can be fun, if it’s intelligently done.

I do think Neo-neocon does better than most bloggers on either side, most of the time, but we all have time constraints. Which is why it’s good of people like you to drop by with your information. I wouldn’t have checked MO’s thesis because it is irrelevant to how I intend to vote, so now I know something I wouldn’t have. Thanks.

Also, as an aside, I am not a conservative, nor do I play one on TV, so if you’re looking my way when you talk about being the only one here defending conservative values, I’m not really a concerned party. It is interesting that you seem to identify high standards, good fact-checking and giving opponents the benefit of the doubt as conservative values, though. Or maybe you’re being facetious, which would seem to be in character.

In thinking about it I would like to change “much” to any.

You’re right. I should have just answered Sally’s charge of being a liar and left it at that. But the rest was actually kind of fun – I’m weak, what can I say.

The reasons that I didn’t respond to you earlier are at least two fold: 1) your request wasn’t a response to the substance of any of my comments and a response seemed extraneous, and 2) I did doubt your sincerity and assumed that you would just run out to find violations of intellectual fortitude to use as “proof” of my hypocrisy and thus for all times proving that I was wrong and MO really is a racist Marxist. I apologize for thinking the worst.

Mostly though, because it has no bearing on my comments regarding MO and the Thesis. And participating in what I perceived (perhaps wrongly) to be an apparent effort to discredit me by deflection from my original points just didn’t appeal to me. Make of it what you will.

Given the easy task of fact checking a readily available document and the fact that it has been a significant part of a larger propaganda effort to smear the Obamas I thought it worthwhile to pursue, and it conformed to my own time constraints. If someone wrote that John McCain wrote a senior thesis calling for a fascist utopia I’d be equally skeptical and, if readily available, would read the thesis and call bullshit with equal gusto. Event without reading I wouldn’t give the charge much credence.

Ultimately, we all set the bar for ourselves. I make no apologies if I set the bar higher than most. Damn, the more I respond, the more I start to think that I’m the only one here defending conservative values.

I guess I could assume the worst, which might be that he can’t answer my question without admitting that he is holding Neo-neocon to a higher standard than the blogs he regularly reads, making him a hypocrite.

But it’s quite possible he just doesn’t regularly read or respect any blogger. Or, it’s possible that he really doesn’t want to advertise in case we follow him home and mess up the place. (I for one would have my swastikad jackboots up on the coffee table in no time, no doubt.) Or, any number of other reasons. However, in a case where his main focus has been on intellectual integrity and the willingness to honestly engage the opposition, one might expect some kind of reply to a serious question.

Or maybe not. Whatever.

Truly, you have a dizzying intellect and I am no match. Thank you for recognizing and evaluating my aspirations – I am feeling much more validated as a result. And yes, I will keep working at it.

Regards.

There’s not a single blog you can recommend? No blogger who handles primary sources to your satisfaction? That’s sad, but it might be indicative of the rules of discourse in the blogosphere, both dextro- and sinistro-.

Or maybe you don’t want to infest their comments with jackbooted Nazi brownshirt Rethuglican warmonger wingnut chickenhawks from the reich wing of the aisle?

Anyway, if you think of one, especially political blogs, I’m actually interested.