Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 1466 } Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posted: Wed 08 Oct 2008 16:09 Post subject:
anonymouse wrote:
I think they are ignoring Palin because it is old news. The subject was brought up by Clinton early on this year, was addressed and eventually discredited/disregarded as irrelevant. So for Palin to bring it up, attempt put a little more spin on it by sensationalizing the story and presenting it as a groundbreaking revelation is a bit silly
No it was not discredited/disregarded as irrelevant. The traditional media does not want to run anything that could potentially hurt its candiadate, Obama. A man as intelligent as Obama should have known about Bill Ayers and his actions. I'm sure though at the time, he would have never guessed that he would be a serious candidate for Commander In Chief of the Armed Forces, the same Armed Forces the man, Ayers, who bombed the headquarters of, was proud of doing it, and has not repented for it. The same man who launched the political career of Barack Hussein Obama.
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 1466 } Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posted: Wed 08 Oct 2008 16:45 Post subject:
chip wrote:
What I find disgusting is the overwhelmingly left leaning press is ostracizing Palin for bringing this up, without even checking into the facts. Hey, if you say something a million times and you and all your friends can agree, you must be right.
What the screwballs on the left increasingly fail to recognize, is the mostly silent reaction of quiet middle America, who see this prejudice clearly are quite offended by it and will make their presence felt once again at the voting booth.
You got it. Many people who are not as vocal as me and others see this with the traditional media. The traditional media will try and do what they did in 2004 at around 5 PM EST, that is to all but call the election for Kerry. They will try and do this here, with more intensity, IMO. The silent people (people with guns and cling onto religion) are smarter than the liberal establishment gives them credit for. This is why at the end of the day on Nov 4th, it will be President-elect McCain. Not at all that smart people will vote for McCain. It's that these people see through the charade of the traditional or should I say "liberal" media. I guess we'll have to wait and see, I could be totally wrong.
I think they are ignoring Palin because it is old news. The subject was brought up by Clinton early on this year, was addressed and eventually discredited/disregarded as irrelevant. So for Palin to bring it up, attempt put a little more spin on it by sensationalizing the story and presenting it as a groundbreaking revelation is a bit silly
No it was not discredited/disregarded as irrelevant. The traditional media does not want to run anything that could potentially hurt its candiadate, Obama. A man as intelligent as Obama should have known about Bill Ayers and his actions. I'm sure though at the time, he would have never guessed that he would be a serious candidate for Commander In Chief of the Armed Forces, the same Armed Forces the man, Ayers, who bombed the headquarters of, was proud of doing it, and has not repented for it. The same man who launched the political career of Barack Hussein Obama.
That $200 donation sure went a long way. And yes that is sarcasm.
Joined: 24 Sep 2008 {Posts: 102 } Location: Santiago, DR
Posted: Wed 08 Oct 2008 17:22 Post subject:
anonymouse wrote:
chip wrote:
What I find disgusting is the overwhelmingly left leaning press is ostracizing Palin for bringing this up, without even checking into the facts. Hey, if you say something a million times and you and all your friends can agree, you must be right.
What the screwballs on the left increasingly fail to recognize, is the mostly silent reaction of quiet middle America, who see this prejudice clearly are quite offended by it and will make their presence felt once again at the voting booth.
I think they are ignoring Palin because it is old news. The subject was brought up by Clinton early on this year, was addressed and eventually discredited/disregarded as irrelevant. So for Palin to bring it up, attempt put a little more spin on it by sensationalizing the story and presenting it as a groundbreaking revelation is a bit silly
So say you. You can put a wrap up a load of dung in pretty wrapping paper, but at the end of the day it is still dung. In other words, the facts are facts that Obama had much more than a casual relationship with this guy, and I believe this shows a true lack of character, judgement and leadership, bottom line.
Posted: Wed 08 Oct 2008 22:04 Post subject: Obama and ’60s Bomber: A Look Into Crossed Paths
Quote:
October 4, 2008
NY Times
Obama and ’60s Bomber: A Look Into Crossed Paths
By SCOTT SHANE
CHICAGO — At a tumultuous meeting of anti-Vietnam War militants at the Chicago Coliseum in 1969, Bill Ayers helped found the radical Weathermen, launching a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and United States Capitol.
Twenty-six years later, at a lunchtime meeting about school reform in a Chicago skyscraper, Barack Obama met Mr. Ayers, by then an education professor. Their paths have crossed sporadically since then, at a coffee Mr. Ayers hosted for Mr. Obama’s first run for office, on the schools project and a charitable board, and in casual encounters as Hyde Park neighbors.
Their relationship has become a touchstone for opponents of Mr. Obama, the Democratic senator, in his bid for the presidency. Video clips on YouTube, including a new advertisement that was broadcast on Friday, juxtapose Mr. Obama’s face with the young Mr. Ayers or grainy shots of the bombings.
In a televised interview last spring, Senator John McCain, Mr. Obama’s Republican rival, asked, “How can you countenance someone who was engaged in bombings that could have or did kill innocent people?”
More recently, conservative critics who accuse Mr. Obama of a stealth radical agenda have asserted that he has misleadingly minimized his relationship with Mr. Ayers, whom the candidate has dismissed as “a guy who lives in my neighborhood” and “somebody who worked on education issues in Chicago that I know.”
A review of records of the schools project and interviews with a dozen people who know both men, suggest that Mr. Obama, 47, has played down his contacts with Mr. Ayers, 63. But the two men do not appear to have been close. Nor has Mr. Obama ever expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers, whom he has called “somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8.”
Obama campaign aides said the Ayers relationship had been greatly exaggerated by opponents to smear the candidate.
“The suggestion that Ayers was a political adviser to Obama or someone who shaped his political views is patently false,” said Ben LaBolt, a campaign spokesman. Mr. LaBolt said the men first met in 1995 through the education project, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, and have encountered each other occasionally in public life or in the neighborhood. He said they have not spoken by phone or exchanged e-mail messages since Mr. Obama began serving in the United States Senate in January 2005 and last met more than a year ago when they bumped into each other on the street in Hyde Park.
In the stark presentation of a 30-second advertisement or a television clip, Mr. Obama’s connections with a man who once bombed buildings and who is unapologetic about it may seem puzzling. But in Chicago, Mr. Ayers has largely been rehabilitated.
Federal riot and bombing conspiracy charges against him were dropped in 1974 because of illegal wiretaps and other prosecutorial misconduct, and he was welcomed back after years in hiding by his large and prominent family. His father, Thomas G. Ayers, had served as chief executive of Commonwealth Edison, the local power company.
Since earning a doctorate in education at Columbia in 1987, Mr. Ayers has been a professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, the author or editor of 15 books, and an advocate of school reform.
“He’s done a lot of good in this city and nationally,” Mayor Richard M. Daley said in an interview this week, explaining that he has long consulted Mr. Ayers on school issues. Mr. Daley, whose father was Chicago’s mayor during the street violence accompanying the 1968 Democratic National Convention and the so-called Days of Rage the following year, said he saw the bombings of that time in the context of a polarized and turbulent era.
“This is 2008,” Mr. Daley said. “People make mistakes. You judge a person by his whole life.”
That attitude is widely shared in Chicago, but it is not universal. Steve Chapman, a columnist for The Chicago Tribune, defended Mr. Obama’s relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., his longtime pastor, whose black liberation theology and “God damn America” sermon became notorious last spring. But he denounced Mr. Obama for associating with Mr. Ayers, whom he said the University of Illinois should never have hired.
“I don’t think there’s a statute of limitations on terrorist bombings,” Mr. Chapman said in an interview, speaking not of the law but of political and moral implications.
“If you’re in public life, you ought to say, ‘I don’t want to be associated with this guy,’ ” Mr. Chapman said. “If John McCain had a long association with a guy who’d bombed abortion clinics, I don’t think people would say, ‘That’s ancient history.’ ”
Mr. Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, a clinical associate professor at Northwestern University Law School who was also a Weather Underground founder, did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
The Schools Project
The Ayers-Obama connection first came to public attention last spring, when both Senator Hilary Rodham Clinton, Mr. Obama’s Democratic primary rival, and Mr. McCain brought it up. It became the subject of a television advertisement in August by the anti-Obama American Issues Project and drew new attention recently on The Wall Street Journal’s op-ed page and elsewhere as the archives of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge at the University of Illinois were opened to researchers.
That project was part of a national school reform effort financed with $500 million from Walter H. Annenberg, the billionaire publisher and philanthropist and President Richard M. Nixon’s ambassador to the United Kingdom. Many cities applied for the Annenberg money, and Mr. Ayers joined two other local education activists to lead a broad, citywide effort that won nearly $50 million for Chicago.
In March 1995, Mr. Obama became chairman of the six-member board that oversaw the distribution of grants in Chicago. Some bloggers have recently speculated that Mr. Ayers had engineered that post for him.
In fact, according to several people involved, Mr. Ayers played no role in Mr. Obama’s appointment. Instead, it was suggested by Deborah Leff, then president of the Joyce Foundation, a Chicago-based group whose board Mr. Obama, a young lawyer, had joined the previous year. At a lunch with two other foundation heads, Patricia A. Graham of the Spencer Foundation and Adele Simmons of the MacArthur Foundation, Ms. Leff suggested that Mr. Obama would make a good board chairman, she said in an interview. Mr. Ayers was not present and had not suggested Mr. Obama, she said.
Ms. Graham said she invited Mr. Obama to dinner at an Italian restaurant in Chicago and was impressed.
“At the end of the dinner I said, ‘I really want you to be chairman.’ He said, ‘I’ll do it if you’ll be vice chairman,’ ” Ms. Graham recalled, and she agreed.
Archives of the Chicago Annenberg project, which funneled the money to networks of schools from 1995 to 2000, show both men attended six board meetings early in the project — Mr. Obama as chairman, Mr. Ayers to brief members on school issues.
It was later in 1995 that Mr. Ayers and Ms. Dohrn hosted the gathering, in their town house three blocks from Mr. Obama’s home, at which State Senator Alice J. Palmer, who planned to run for Congress, introduced Mr. Obama to a few Democratic friends as her chosen successor. That was one of several such neighborhood events as Mr. Obama prepared to run, said A. J. Wolf, the 84-year-old emeritus rabbi of KAM Isaiah Israel Synagogue, across the street from Mr. Obama’s current house.
“If you ask my wife, we had the first coffee for Barack,” Rabbi Wolf said. He said he had known Mr. Ayers for decades but added, “Bill’s mad at me because I told a reporter he’s a toothless ex-radical.”
“It was kind of a nasty shot,” Mr. Wolf said. “But it’s true. For God’s sake, he’s a professor.”
Other Connections
In 1997, after Mr. Obama took office, the new state senator was asked what he was reading by The Chicago Tribune. He praised a book by Mr. Ayers, “A Kind and Just Parent: The Children of Juvenile Court,” which Mr. Obama called “a searing and timely account of the juvenile court system.” In 2001, Mr. Ayers donated $200 to Mr. Obama’s re-election campaign.
In addition, from 2000 to 2002, the two men also overlapped on the seven-member board of the Woods Fund, a Chicago charity that had supported Mr. Obama’s first work as a community organizer in the 1980s. Officials there said the board met about a dozen times during those three years but declined to make public the minutes, saying they wanted members to be candid in assessing people and organizations applying for grants.
A board member at the time, R. Eden Martin, a corporate lawyer and president of the Commercial Club of Chicago, described both men as conscientious in examining proposed community projects but could recall nothing remarkable about their dealings with each other. “You had people who were liberal and some who were pretty conservative, but we usually reached a consensus,” Mr. Martin said of the panel.
Since 2002, there is little public evidence of their relationship.
If by then the ambitious politician was trying to keep his distance, it would not be a surprise. In an article that by chance was published on Sept. 11, 2001, The New York Times wrote about Mr. Ayers and his just-published memoir, “Fugitive Days,” opening with a quotation from the author: “I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough.”
Three days after the Qaeda attacks, Mr. Ayers wrote a reply posted on his Web site to clarify his quoted remarks, saying the meaning had been distorted.
“My memoir is from start to finish a condemnation of terrorism, of the indiscriminate murder of human beings, whether driven by fanaticism or official policy,” he wrote. But he added that the Weathermen had “showed remarkable restraint” given the nature of the American bombing campaign in Vietnam that they were trying to stop.
Most of the bombs the Weathermen were blamed for had been placed to do only property damage, a fact Mr. Ayers emphasizes in his memoir. But a 1970 pipe bomb in San Francisco attributed to the group killed one police officer and severely hurt another. An accidental 1970 explosion in a Greenwich Village town house basement killed three radicals; survivors later said they had been making nail bombs to detonate at a military dance at Fort Dix in New Jersey. And in 1981, in an armed robbery of a Brinks armored truck in Nanuet, N.Y., that involved Weather Underground members including Kathy Boudin and David Gilbert, two police officers and a Brinks guard were killed.
In his memoir, Mr. Ayers was evasive as to which bombings he had a hand in, writing that “some details cannot be told.” By the time of the Brinks robbery, he and Ms. Dohrn had emerged from underground to raise their two children, then Chesa Boudin, whose parents were imprisoned for their role in the heist.
Little Influence Seen
Mr. Obama’s friends said that history was utterly irrelevant to judging the candidate, because Mr. Ayers was never a significant influence on him. Even some conservatives who know Mr. Obama said that if he was drawn to Ayers-style radicalism, he hid it well.
“I saw no evidence of a radical streak, either overt or covert, when we were together at Harvard Law School,” said Bradford A. Berenson, who worked on the Harvard Law Review with Mr. Obama and who served as associate White House counsel under President Bush. Mr. Berenson, who is backing Mr. McCain, described his fellow student as “a pragmatic liberal” whose moderation frustrated others at the law review whose views were much farther to the left.
Some 15 years later, left-leaning backers of Mr. Obama have the same complaint. “We’re fully for Obama, but we disagree with some of his stands,” said Tom Hayden, the 1960s activist and former California legislator, who helped organize Progressives for Obama. His group opposes the candidate’s call for sending more troops to Afghanistan, for instance, “because we think it’s a quagmire just like Iraq,” he said. “A lot of our work is trying to win over progressives who think Obama is too conservative.”
Mr. Hayden, 68, said he has known Mr. Ayers for 45 years and was on the other side of the split in the radical antiwar movement that led Mr. Ayers and others to form the Weathermen. But Mr. Hayden said he saw attempts to link Mr. Obama with bombings and radicalism as “typical campaign shenanigans.”
“If Barack Obama says he’s willing to talk to foreign leaders without preconditions,” Mr. Hayden said, “I can imagine he’d be willing to talk to Bill Ayers about schools. But I think that’s about as far as their relationship goes.”
What I find disgusting is the overwhelmingly left leaning press is ostracizing Palin for bringing this up, without even checking into the facts. Hey, if you say something a million times and you and all your friends can agree, you must be right.
What the screwballs on the left increasingly fail to recognize, is the mostly silent reaction of quiet middle America, who see this prejudice clearly are quite offended by it and will make their presence felt once again at the voting booth.
I think they are ignoring Palin because it is old news. The subject was brought up by Clinton early on this year, was addressed and eventually discredited/disregarded as irrelevant. So for Palin to bring it up, attempt put a little more spin on it by sensationalizing the story and presenting it as a groundbreaking revelation is a bit silly
So say you. You can put a wrap up a load of dung in pretty wrapping paper, but at the end of the day it is still dung. In other words, the facts are facts that Obama had much more than a casual relationship with this guy, and I believe this shows a true lack of character, judgement and leadership, bottom line.
So sayeth the esteemed governor Palin. But where is the proof? Surely in this digital age we live in there must be some evidence of this "more than casual relationship." So far all we have to go on is a $200 donation 17 years ago. And they live in teh same neighbourhood. Oh and they both were working to get money to schools.
Pretty thin straws IMO. But I find it odd that you (and others) insist there must be more to their "relationship" but with nothing to back up your claim. Why is that?
I got this in an email the other day and I found it quite interesting:
Quote:
Food for thought…
What if the candidate’s lives were reversed?
What if John McCain were a former president of the Harvard Law Review?
What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his graduating class?
What if McCain were still married to the first woman he said "I do" to?
What if Obama were the candidate who left his first wife after she no longer measured up to his standards?
What if Michelle Obama were a wife who not only became addicted to pain killers, but acquired them illegally through her charitable organization?
What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard?
What if Obama were a member of the Keating-5?
What if McCain were a charismatic, eloquent speaker?
If the above questions reflected reality, do you really believe the election numbers would be as close as they are?
You are The Boss. Which team would you hire? With America facing historic debt, 2 wars, stumbling health care, a weakened dollar, all-time high prison population, mortgage crises, bank foreclosures, etc.
Educational Background:
McCain:
Columbia University - B.A. Political Science with a Specialization in International Relations.
Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude
Palin:
University of Delaware - B.A in History and B.A. in Political Science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.) versus
Obama:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank: 894 of 899
Biden:
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in Journalism
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 1466 } Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posted: Thu 09 Oct 2008 02:13 Post subject:
Quote:
Food for thought…
What if the candidate’s lives were reversed?
What if John McCain were a former president of the Harvard Law Review?
What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his graduating class?
What if McCain were still married to the first woman he said "I do" to?
What if Obama were the candidate who left his first wife after she no longer measured up to his standards?
What if Michelle Obama were a wife who not only became addicted to pain killers, but acquired them illegally through her charitable organization?
What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard?
What if Obama were a member of the Keating-5?
What if McCain were a charismatic, eloquent speaker?
If the above questions reflected reality, do you really believe the election numbers would be as close as they are?
You are The Boss. Which team would you hire? With America facing historic debt, 2 wars, stumbling health care, a weakened dollar, all-time high prison population, mortgage crises, bank foreclosures, etc.
Educational Background:
McCain:
Columbia University - B.A. Political Science with a Specialization in International Relations.
Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude
Palin:
University of Delaware - B.A in History and B.A. in Political Science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.) versus
Obama:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank: 894 of 899
Biden:
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in Journalism
Now, which team are you going to hire?
I'm not an elitist. Ivy League education does not impress me. I have seen slouch's from Ivy League schools. Also, I think part of the problem with people in politics today is that there are way too many attorneys. It's like having the fox gaurd the chicken coop. We need people at the helm who can relate to the real people, not to the lawyers, lobbyists, and CEOs. This is within both parties, so it's not a slam on Obama.
Yeah on paper, team Obama has the better credentials. But paper has to be put into practicality, real life. I say John McCain's real life experiences far exceed Obama. Just my opinion. Also there are many in academia who are intelligent, from the top schools, but could not make it in the real world outside of academia, so how good really are those credentials??? Biden hasn't practiced law in at least 36 years, I'm sure he would be a good lawyer though, nonetheless, has been in government almost all of his working life. I am more inclined to vote for someone who is not a lawyer. I guess you can say is I just do not trust most of them in the politics.
I say John McCain's real life experiences far exceed Obama.
Of course they do - John McCain is old enough to be Obama's father. That, however does not automatically qualify him to lead this county. Older people usually have more life experiences than younger people simply because they've been here longer but I bet you would never suggest that only old people are qualified to run this country based on "life experience", would you?
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 1466 } Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posted: Thu 09 Oct 2008 16:32 Post subject:
anonymouse wrote:
DChapman wrote:
I say John McCain's real life experiences far exceed Obama.
Of course they do - John McCain is old enough to be Obama's father. That, however does not automatically qualify him to lead this county. Older people usually have more life experiences than younger people simply because they've been here longer but I bet you would never suggest that only old people are qualified to run this country based on "life experience", would you?
I am more inclined to support an older person over the younger, generally speaking. Since Obama has not lead anything, not even in the Senate, I do not think he's qualified to lead this nation and its Armed Forces.
I say John McCain's real life experiences far exceed Obama.
Of course they do - John McCain is old enough to be Obama's father. That, however does not automatically qualify him to lead this county. Older people usually have more life experiences than younger people simply because they've been here longer but I bet you would never suggest that only old people are qualified to run this country based on "life experience", would you?
I am more inclined to support an older person over the younger, generally speaking. Since Obama has not lead anything, not even in the Senate, I do not think he's qualified to lead this nation and its Armed Forces.
Leading entities might give one experience, but efficacy is another matter. Education at elite schools might provide one with more exposure to movers and shakers, but intellectual curiousity and acumen can be developed in many places.
George Bush was a CEO, governor of a large border state with a complex economy, and is Ivy-League educated. He's arguably the worst president we've ever had.
Age, sex and race are not good indicators of aptitude to lead or to be a good president. "Experience" is too murky a concept to be useful, especially since both McCain and Obama do not have executive experience.
McCain graduated at the bottom of his class - not a dealbreaker except if you think about class standing as a litmus test for the ability to succeed in a given environment rather than intelligence. I doubt that he would have made it as far as he did in the Navy without his family connections. There are much better military leaders and the advanced political skills comparable to national office in the military come with making general/admiral, which McCain never did. I happen to believe he is a great senator and that he might have made a decent president in 2000, but now he is just a pandering right-wing robot. Apparently he will say or do just about anything to get elected, even changing long-held positions and giving into erratic impulses. I don't think this is a consequence of age. I think he has always been an impulsive risk-taker who only modifies his behavior after severe personal trauma (i.e., Vietnam, Keating 5, 2000 primary).
I'd prefer a more steady hand at the healm, a cool, calm and collected character with his hand on the button. The world doesn't need another hot head or ideologue.
I do not believe that Obama had or has a meaningful relationship with Ayers or any domestic terrorist. It completely contradicts his known behavior, which is nothing if pro-establishment. This is a fair game issue, but I believe it is being manufactured. If Hillary Clinton dropped it that tells me everything I need to know. There's no way she wouldn't have run it into the ground if there was any merit.
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1301 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Thu 23 Oct 2008 16:35 Post subject:
Quote:
Time magazine's latest poll finds that Obama leads in Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia -- four states won by Bush in 2004. Their results show that McCain's latest attacks aren't having much of an impact:
The polls also suggest that the McCain campaign's recent attempts to link the Democratic nominee to former domestic terrorist William Ayers and the liberal organizing group ACORN (which the GOP accuses of perpetrating voter fraud) are not resonating with most voters. ... Although a majority of voters in Virginia, Ohio and North Carolina had heard of Ayers and ACORN, less than a third of voters said such issues would affect their votes.
Joined: 24 Sep 2008 {Posts: 102 } Location: Santiago, DR
Posted: Thu 23 Oct 2008 16:59 Post subject:
sagascend wrote:
I do not believe that Obama had or has a meaningful relationship with Ayers or any domestic terrorist. It completely contradicts his known behavior, which is nothing if pro-establishment. This is a fair game issue, but I believe it is being manufactured. If Hillary Clinton dropped it that tells me everything I need to know. There's no way she wouldn't have run it into the ground if there was any merit.
You apparently don't know about his relationship with McKnight then. This isn't to say Obama is an anarchist (or terrorist), just that his personal associations and his political history show lack of judgment and leadership.
I don't but into the malarkey that he didn't know about Ayers stance, as Ayers helped him start his political career in Ayers living room. It is even ludicrous to postulate that they didn't discuss a variety of topics before they got to that point - utterly ludicrous. It is even worse to deny that and try to convince us we are stupid if we believe it.
Heck, I ain't nothing special but my parents taught me to be careful who to associate with and I'm sure Obama's grandparents did the same.
Again, Obama is no terrorist nor anarchist but someone who has shown a consitent lack of judgment, period.
Last edited by chip on Thu 23 Oct 2008 17:19; edited 2 times in total
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 1466 } Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posted: Thu 23 Oct 2008 17:17 Post subject:
sagascend wrote:
I do not believe that Obama had or has a meaningful relationship with Ayers or any domestic terrorist. It completely contradicts his known behavior, which is nothing if pro-establishment. This is a fair game issue, but I believe it is being manufactured. If Hillary Clinton dropped it that tells me everything I need to know. There's no way she wouldn't have run it into the ground if there was any merit.
I cannot prove it definitively, but I have read and suspected that Hillary was told to drop it by the DNC. It was looking like Obama would be the nominee. Any further pressing of the issue, was food for the GOP to be used during the general campaign. I am quite sure privately, the Clintons and many of their supporters wished they had pressed it further, not that Hillary doesn't have any skeletons in her closet.
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1301 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Thu 23 Oct 2008 17:46 Post subject:
chip wrote:
sagascend wrote:
I do not believe that Obama had or has a meaningful relationship with Ayers or any domestic terrorist. It completely contradicts his known behavior, which is nothing if pro-establishment. This is a fair game issue, but I believe it is being manufactured. If Hillary Clinton dropped it that tells me everything I need to know. There's no way she wouldn't have run it into the ground if there was any merit.
You apparently don't know about his relationship with McKnight then. This isn't to say Obama is an anarchist (or terrorist), just that his personal associations and his political history show lack of judgment and leadership.
I don't but into the malarkey that he didn't know about Ayers stance, as Ayers helped him start his political career in Ayers living room. It is even ludicrous to postulate that they didn't discuss a variety of topics before they got to that point - utterly ludicrous. It is even worse to deny that and try to convince us we are stupid if we believe it.
Heck, I ain't nothing special but my parents taught me to be careful who to associate with and I'm sure Obama's grandparents did the same.
Again, Obama is no terrorist nor anarchist but someone who has shown a consitent lack of judgment, period.
Well I'm sure he has learned his lesson, lets move on.
I do not believe that Obama had or has a meaningful relationship with Ayers or any domestic terrorist. It completely contradicts his known behavior, which is nothing if pro-establishment. This is a fair game issue, but I believe it is being manufactured. If Hillary Clinton dropped it that tells me everything I need to know. There's no way she wouldn't have run it into the ground if there was any merit.
You apparently don't know about his relationship with McKnight then. This isn't to say Obama is an anarchist (or terrorist), just that his personal associations and his political history show lack of judgment and leadership.
I don't but into the malarkey that he didn't know about Ayers stance, as Ayers helped him start his political career in Ayers living room. It is even ludicrous to postulate that they didn't discuss a variety of topics before they got to that point - utterly ludicrous. It is even worse to deny that and try to convince us we are stupid if we believe it.
Heck, I ain't nothing special but my parents taught me to be careful who to associate with and I'm sure Obama's grandparents did the same.
Again, Obama is no terrorist nor anarchist but someone who has shown a consitent lack of judgment, period.
Is it National Non Sequitur Day?
I am aware of Obama's connection to McKnight and it changes nothing about my conclusion that Obama had or has a meaningful relationship with Ayers or any domestic terrorist. It completely contradicts his known behavior, which is nothing if pro-establishment.
God knows what professors who wrote my recommendations to school may be into, and to insinuate that a student falls in lock, stock and barrel with a professor's ideology or personal political beliefs based on a recommendation, teaching assistant relationship, thesis direction or other such activities is pretty spurious. I'd rather judge Obama on his own actions and professed beliefs. I'd pay more attention to his intimate relationships with people very close to him for years over more formal or loose associations. And even then, for me it comes down to his own behavior and beliefs. People are only responsible for themselves and their children until adulthood, no one else.
What I didn't say before and I'll say now, is that my uncredentialed psychological profile of Obama places him as a person who stays detached from his associations with all but people in his inner circle. He strikes me as the guy who can find common ground with anyone but who doesn't let many people in. He has probably learned to get what he wants from people without having to give too much in return. You don't grow up like he did and not learn how to protect your "core."
As for everything else you mentioned, how on earth did you get there from what I wrote?
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
