I got you excusing his behaviour right away, does not make your comment a reply on the question though, get it?
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at January 24, 2017 10:15 AM MST
http://answermug.com/forums/topic/11692/sexual-predators-come-in-all-colors-we-are-entering-the-bill-co
This post was edited by my2cents at January 23, 2017 4:04 PM MST
Oh good grief, I already answered you by saying that I don't know anyone who would defend Clinton for his actions. And this is about how people would react to Obama making a rude comment about women and has nothing to do with Clinton. You did start out answering the question I asked, so thank you for that.
What I edited was I had put the word "said" in front of Obama's name which was incorrect grammar and an incorrect statement as I had said anything about Obama.
This is my answer to your your question. My other post was not an answer to the question but a reply to a thread on someone else's answer.
You may have misunderstood my answer above. The bottom part is a copy of an answer of mine from Oct. Showing that I did not defend Trump. It is not asking you if you are defending Clinton.
This post was edited by my2cents at January 23, 2017 4:09 PM MST
No, not saying that at all. Not sure how you tried to draw that conclusion either.
But I will say that a LOT more people in the media were searching for that kind of dirt on Trump than on Obama. And the news organizations that I've worked with can be relentless in pursuing that kind of "quest".
RE:"But I will say that a LOT more people in the media were searching for that kind of dirt on Trump than on Obama. "
This is an ideology-based assertion for which you have ZERO evidence and for which the counterexample of the "Birther" movement sugests you're full of beans...;-D...
But perhaps you missed the part where I mentioned that I've actually worked for a number of major news operations. I know how newsrooms work and how diligent reporters (which I admit are almost non-existent these days) and researchers can be with digging up the "facts" when given an "assignment" to focus on.
On the other hand I'm strongly convinced that you have absolutely NO experience in the world of news-gathering. It's you that has no idea of what you're talking about. You're the one that's spewing organic fertilizer, not me.
(And what in the name of Hades is the reference to the "Birther" movement started by Hillary Clinton? What brought that that currently irrelevant thought to your mind?)
I was joking around with you because you used the word "overheard" as opposed to having him on actual audio tape.
I do think if Obama had been taped saying that, it would have been released. All it takes is one person who doesn't want a candidate in office to find the smoking gun. However, I do agree that a lot more people were searching for more dirt on Trump than Obama because Trump has said so many inappropriate things on camera that they have had a field day with him. Since you worked with news organizations you know that the objective is to be the first one with a story. What is better than having a presidential candidate be caught saying something not presidential?
Trump has a looooong history of being inappropriate. He's been in headlines for years, seemingly enjoying the negative attention. I'm old enough to remember him from way back. I am not surprised at anything that I have heard about him.
I am certain they would have released Obama saying inappropriate things because there were a whole lot of people that never wanted that man as president. Racism hasn't suddenly left our great country. I certainly remember all the video of Obama's pastor being hateful. There was no hold backs on that, even if it wasn't even Obama carrying on like that. It was a low point in Obama's bid for the White House and it could have cost him.
I remember them looking for something to say about Obama on a daily bases. And making a big deal over nothing like rolling up his sleeves to the color of his tie.