I don't know how wide spread this kind of thing is, perhaps (hopefully) these represent some isolated incidents.   Nonetheless, it is troubling.  

(or of Obama's shameful speech in Atlanta yesterday where Obama went into a church used MLK as cover and delivered and overtly political hitjob on John Edwards and Hillary Clinton)

At any rate, I simply pointed out that Obama is mystery to many voters and he himself has not always been helpful in clearing that up.  Whether the issue be small or large, he seems unforthcoming.

Did his half brother Mike go to Berkeley, as Obama claims, or to Standard, as seems may be the case.   Why is it so hard to get such small pieces of information?

There is a power struggles being waged in an important African nation as we sit here today.  The man contesting the elections, and challenging the sitting President, is said to be Obama's uncle.  That would seem to be a very big story ... a Presidential contenders uncle challenging for the leadership of another nation.  

Obama's campaign will not confirm or deny that the man is indeed Obama's uncle.  Again how hard is this, Obama either is or he isn't.

Obama seems to have a pattern of wanting to tell us his lifes story only on his terms, from his perspective and seems to be very leary of letting anyone else get a look and form their own judgements.

I think there is something very fishy about writing about book, saying this is your story, this tells you all about me, but by the way the names and places have been changed.  

You better believe I could write one hell of a book about me if I didn't have to use real names and could change places around.   I'd be the great thing since sliced bread.   You may even want to make me President.   I can always hope right?

But to close, I think facts matter.  Someone baited me asked if I want to talk about Hugh Rodham.   I do.  I want to talk about all the candidates and all the facts, and all the associations positive and negative.

If Obama would be more forth coming, and the media actually covered like a candidate, many of us would not have to be left to google to find facts, and be at risk of coming across certain sites.  

There are really only a handful of Hillary Supporters that do stuff like this.  Unfortunately, a very small percentage of the posters on here are making it almost impossible to have a rational dialogue.  

Let's be real about a couple things.

First, if linking to Drudge is supposed to be the mark of something sinister, I'm confident there are just as many guilty Obama supporters as Clinton supporters.  It's not worth the time to investigate, but I assure you there is plenty of guilt to go around.

Second, while there were some dubious sources cited in that diary you mention, in reality people basically use Google and include the first link that backs them up.  It might be sloppy, but again, I've seen this from lots of people.  It doesn't mean Clinton supporters are sitting there with a library of Townhall columns to cite to.

What do you mean John Edwards doesn't have a love child? But, I read it in national enquirer - it must be true!

God -- this diary would be much  more credible if you didnt just pick out HRC supporters (and the 2 diaries out of the last 20 or so that actually had a bad source).

Anyone can write a diary by cherry picking, but dont attribute to everyone

Ya'll should check out some of the new diaries, which (1) denigrate MLK and the civil rights movement while slamming Obama; and (2) use UTUBE footage as "proof" that Obama sells drugs and has gay sex in limos.  

Wow.  That's all i can say.  Wow.