Add to that the examples of voter fraud found in Ohio by Obama campaign workers in cahoots with Obama-supporting Ohio poll judges, and it becomes pretty obvious that blakes NEEDS to tear down conservatives; his own side is showing their addiction to lawbreaking and criminal activity.

Maybe Blakes is tacitly admitting that he cannot defend his team.

As for Joe – there’s the old cliche that a gaffe occurs when a politician accidently tells the truth. With a couple of days left until the election, an accidental truth eruption is the last thing in the universe Obama needs.

And you don’t even address the question, but go off on a tear against conservatives. Once again, you demonstrate your ignorance about us. Go check the conservative blogs and editorial pages for the past eight years and you’ll see a wealth of criticism of the Administration.

Interesting how you respond to my posts, instead of addressing the point, you repeat discredited left-wing talking points attacking Republicans and conservatives.

Please tell me how this post is whining?

And why should they put Biden out there more than is necessary, as you put it? Um, blake, should he win, he’d be a heartbeat away from the presidency. Shouldn’t we factor his gaffes into our evaluation of his quality to serve?

The issue here is the sequestering of Biden. And the left’s silence. I guess you’d rather attack conservatives than defend your own.

Meh. Biden is a known quantity. He’s been around for 26 years. It’s the closing days of the campaign, everyone knows Biden can be a gaffe machine. So, why would they put him out there more than necessary?

Again, this sounds like crybaby whining at this point 3 days before the election.

There is an irony here. For 8 years, most conservatives had their lips pressed firmly to both Bush’s and Chaney’s asses and defended their secrecy and constitutional abuses. It will be interesting to see under a likely Obama administration how many conservatives are likely to agree with an “imperial presidency.”

I’ve commented before about the use of “thugocracy” by this blog. What I find interesting has been the willingness to ignore the fears and actual abusive of governmental powers by the Bush administration.

Now, a vice-presidential candidate isn’t out there and that is disturbing but a vice-president who held secret meeting with the energy industry was A.O.K? A V.P. who refused to respond to congressional subpoenas under the guise that he had executive privilege one day but legislative privilege on another day was not upsetting?

Please, so that I’m not generalizing, could you tell me whether you disagreed with Cheney’s actions? That would help me have a conversation with you about vice presidents and their responsibility to communicate openly with the American people.