I picked up the local newspaper, the Glen Rose Reporter, last night and, in thumbing through it, saw a number of political ads for people running for office (or ads for one party versus another).  I plan to write some more about the entire ad later,but one part stuck out immediately.

Um. SO? Is Sid Miller trying to insinuate that there is something WRONG with being for or against various candidates before voting for them in the primary? Is he trying, vague smear-style, to insinuate that there is something wrong with being FOR OBAMA before one is, presumably FORCED TO BE BECAUSE OBAMA IS THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE? C'mon. How else can one read this? The implication, from a REPUBLICAN, is that people who are Democrats would only be voting for Obama because they are FORCED TO, BECAUSE he is the Democratic party candidate. For Mr Miller's information, there are lots of people in Somervell County who support Barack Obama for president. In fact, there are people in his DISTRICT, lots of them, that support Barack Obama. And did so BEFORE the primaries or conventions.

Let's just take this further. What reason in the world would there be NOT to support Obama? Surely Miller is not one of the ignorant who is passing on spurious smear information, like the baloney emails about Obama not saluting the flag or being a Muslim (he's a CHRISTIAN), or being the antichrist or the other ridiculous spam-like smears that some pass on without even considering whether they're 1. And one would hope that, unlike so much of the Republican party, which seems to be wanting to grab the mantle of the Party of Racism and Bigotry, that he's not trying to infer that people shouldn't vote for Obama because he is half black? Or maybe Miller is, without saying so, trying to raise the specter of the Liberal Democrat; if so, then that would apply to ANY Democrat that Republicans are scared to put into office, and certainly would have nothing to do with who is the party candidate-in other words, ANY Democrat that Republicans want to try to demonize as being unfit for office wouldn't be suitable in a Republican's eyes, regardless of WHEN that candidate was supported.

I know Mr. Miller reads this blog. So I would like him to say, right out in the open, what reason he would give for it to be WRONG to be for Barack Obama, why this would be considered a negative against Ernie Casbeer. And why WHEN Casbeer decided to be for him has one whit beyond "Who the Heck Cares" to it.