[quote]rainjack wrote:
Obama is now a nation?
Shit. [/quote]
Yeah and he is going to legitamize Iranian terror…
Seriously, I am just saying that the whole “guilt by association” attack is some pretty week shit. Even though I believe that McCain is innocent of any wrong-doing in regards to Keating. I could say he is for swindling the American tax payers out of billions of dollars because of his association with him. Total bullshit.
xtolgax, did you mean to say something?
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
This entire post depends upon the idea that Obama just “knew” Ayers. If that’s all it was, you’re right. But that’s not all it was, and you know it. Also, it was just a few years ago that Ayers was celebrating and bragging about his bombings.
[/quote]
As for “celebrating and bragging about his bombings”, I don’t think there is any evidence of that. If you are talking about his statement, “We didn’t do enough about Vietnam”, he explained that he did not mean that “We did not bomb enough shit”, he said that he meant that everybody did not do enough to stop the war.
Now, one could say that he was lying. Just like I COULD say that Sarah Palin was lying when she said that her statement about God and Iraq was intended to mean that she hoped that God’s will was on the side of the US in its invasion of Iraq. I prefer to take them both at their word. Why shouldn’t I?
However, the truth is that Ayers is not presently engaged in terrorist activity. He’s a professor and community activist. You can agree or disagree with his present positions.
Let’s see he held a fund-raiser for Obama when the latter ran for the state senate. I believe Obama may have praised him for some work and a book he did. So what?
Ok, let me state it here. I have a lot of good things to say about Heidegger even though he was a member of the German National Socialist Party (Nazi) and was not only a passive member of that group but saw to it that Jewish professors were expelled from their posts when he was rector at the University of Freiburg.
Does that make me a Nazi, because I find some good things to say about a Nazi…one who never, EVER even renounced what he did (unlike Ayers) even though he had every chance to do so publicly, especially in his famous interview in Der Spiegel?
I still don’t understand what those concerned about this Ayers-Obama connection conclude from this?
[quote]Gael wrote:
xtolgax, did you mean to say something?[/quote]
no, I was quoting for emphasis, because if pat can tell us who Ayers murdered in cold blood (or in any temperature of blood), it would be the news of the year.
TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE… the entire weather underground death toll is around 6, with 3 of those being their own members who died while putting together a bomb. The other 3 deaths came much later (1980, 81?) when the group was a shadow of its former self and ayers was no longer involved.
Furthermore, to the best of my knowledge, WU bombings, like the ETA bombings, were planned to AVOID casualties.
I don’t care to get into political pissing matches, but sometimes facts are useful.
October 07, 2008
The Real Obama
By Thomas Sowell
Critics of Senator Barack Obama make a strategic mistake when they talk about his “past associations.” That just gives his many defenders in the media an opportunity to counter-attack against “guilt by association.”
We all have associations, whether at the office, in our neighborhood or in various recreational activities. Most of us neither know nor care what our associates believe or say about politics.
[i]Associations are very different from alliances. Allies are not just people who happen to be where you are or who happen to be doing the same things you do. You choose allies deliberately for a reason. The kind of allies you choose says something about you.
Jeremiah Wright, Father Michael Pfleger, William Ayers and Antoin Rezko are not just people who happened to be at the same place at the same time as Barack Obama. They are people with whom he chose to ally himself for years, and with some of whom some serious money changed hands.
Some gave political support, and some gave financial support, to Obama’s election campaigns, and Obama in turn contributed either his own money or the taxpayers’ money to some of them. That is a familiar political alliance-- but an alliance is not just an “association” from being at the same place at the same time.
Obama could have allied himself with all sorts of other people. But, time and again, he allied himself with people who openly expressed their hatred of America. No amount of flags on his campaign platforms this election year can change that. [/i]
Unfortunately, all that most people know about Barack Obama is his own rhetoric and that of his critics. Moreover, some of his more irresponsible critics have made wild accusations-- that he is not an American citizen or that he is a Muslim, for example.
All that such false charges do is discredit Obama’s critics in general. Fortunately, there is a documented, factual account of what Barack Obama has actually been doing over the years, as distinguished from what he has been saying during this election campaign, in a new best-selling book.
That book is titled “The Case Against Barack Obama” by David Freddoso. He starts off in the introduction by repudiating those critics of Obama who “have been content merely to slander him-- to claim falsely that he refuses to salute the U.S. flag or was sworn into office on a Koran, or that he was born in a foreign country.”
This is a serious book with 35 pages of documentation in the back to support the things said in the main text. In other words, if you don’t believe what the author says, he lets you know where you can go check it out.
Barack Obama’s being the first serious black candidate for President of the United States is what most people consider remarkable but how he got there is at least equally surprising.
The story of Obama’s political career is not a pretty story. He won his first political victory by being the only candidate on the ballot-- after hiring someone skilled at disqualifying the signers of opposing candidates’ petitions, on whatever technicality he could come up with.
Despite his words today about “change” and “cleaning up the mess in Washington,” Obama was not on the side of reformers who were trying to change the status quo of corrupt, machine politics in Chicago and clean up the mess there. Obama came out in favor of the Daley machine and against reform candidates.
Senator Obama is running on an image that is directly the opposite of what he has been doing for two decades. His escapes from his past have been as remarkable as the great escapes of Houdini.
Why much of the public and the media have been so mesmerized by the words and the image of Obama, and so little interested in learning about the factual reality, was perhaps best explained by an official of the Democratic Party: “People don’t come to Obama for what he’s done, they come because of what they hope he can be.”
David Freddoso’s book should be read by those people who want to know what the facts are. But neither this book nor anything else is likely to change the minds of Obama’s true believers, who have made up their minds and don’t want to be confused by the facts.
Copyright 2008, Creators Syndicate Inc.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/10/the_real_obama.html
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
October 07, 2008
The Real Obama
By Thomas Sowell
[/quote]
I love Thomas Sowell and this piece is right on as usual. In case anybody doesn’t know and cares, Sowell is as black as the ace of spades as well and unlike so many others should a be a true role model for what this country can mean to anybody, including blacks if they shun the socialist victim game played by those who exploit them.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
tom63 wrote:
The group he was with bombed the Pentagon, the Capitol, and a judge’s home. This is terrorism. As of last year he was still unrepentant.
So?! What does it have to do with this election?
And even still, why aren’t all muggers, rapists, and cold-blooded killers called terrorists? Terrorism is just a word that simple minded people use because their emotions are more prominent than their intellect. You think it means something more than it does because you’re not intelligent enough to see there is no clear distinction between terrorism and crime. And even worse you are a pawn to be manipulated.[/quote]
Okay, I can see that you’re stupid so I’ll take this approach.
Imagine John McCain started his political career with Timothy McVeigh. Now I know he’s dead, so let’s say McVeigh didn’t kill anyone but had right wing neo nazi political beliefs. He still believed these things like Jews were this and blacks were that.
What would you say about his association? What would you say if McCain went one time by accident to a church run by David Duke? I’m sure that would be a big deal. But Obama can hang around a racist church for 20 years and hang with a terrorist 10-15 years.
You know when this dipshit was bombing buildings in this country. McCain was being tortured in a prison camp for 5 1/2 years.
Liberals are stupid.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
October 07, 2008
The Real Obama
By Thomas Sowell
I love Thomas Sowell and this piece is right on as usual. In case anybody doesn’t know and cares, Sowell is as black as the ace of spades as well and unlike so many others should a be a true role model for what this country can mean to anybody, including blacks if they shun the socialist victim game played by those who exploit them.[/quote]
And Sowell makes excellent points. A republican would get boiled alive for associations, while a guy like Obama has alliances that people just don’t care about.
If I hung out with the local dopers, people would think I take drugs. If I worked together with them, people would think I sold drugs.
[quote]xtolgax wrote:
Gael wrote:
xtolgax, did you mean to say something?
no, I was quoting for emphasis, because if pat can tell us who Ayers murdered in cold blood (or in any temperature of blood), it would be the news of the year.
TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE… the entire weather underground death toll is around 6, with 3 of those being their own members who died while putting together a bomb. The other 3 deaths came much later (1980, 81?) when the group was a shadow of its former self and ayers was no longer involved.
Furthermore, to the best of my knowledge, WU bombings, like the ETA bombings, were planned to AVOID casualties.
I don’t care to get into political pissing matches, but sometimes facts are useful.[/quote]
I don’t give a crap if they were planned to not hgurt people and only killed 6, including there own.
You don’t have any right to damage someone else’s property and as a tax payer I get offended when soemone tries to break my shit.
[quote]tom63 wrote:
Liberals are stupid.
[/quote]
I doubt you even know what the term liberal means.
[quote]entheogens wrote:
Look, I have a number of things to say about this.
How about another Right-wing public intellectual, David Horowitz. He was a left-wing radical in his youth. Should we consider politicians who had dealings with him, Reagan for one, to be considered suspect?
People with very different viewpoints can agree on some specific, individual goals. If you go to an anti-war meeting, you will often see old ladies from the Society of Friends (Quakers), Libertarians, and an Anarchist or two, and many other types of people. That doesn’t make the Quakers anarchists, it doesn’t make the Libertarians Quakers. They all just have a momentary common interest.
Think about the Civil Rights marches in the 60s… you could find a White Liberal from the North, a Black Baptist and, perhaps, Clint Eastwood at that march. Eastwood might momentarily find himself in agreement with a White Liberal who, in another context, would be diametrically opposed to Eastwood on the issue of gun rights.
Same goes for community organizations directed towards achieving some benefit for the community…you will find all types.
Now Ayers might have done some stupid stuff in his youth, you might not agree with what he says/thinks now, but he is peacefully trying to direct his energies nowadays. So what if Obama knew him. Does that make Obama a terrorist? Does it even mean that he agrees for the most part with Ayers’ present positions? What does it mean?
[/quote]
Ayers has said “we didnt do enough”. I’ll let you figure out for yourself what that means.
Picture this:
Lets say you went for a job as a secret service agent, and they start doing a background check on you. Don’t you think belonging to an “I hate white people” church for 20 years, and being an associate of a guy that blow up buildings would get you disqualified? So in other words he couldnt even get a job to be his bodyguard. Shit he cant even find his own birth certificate these days.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
tom63 wrote:
Liberals are stupid.
I doubt you even know what the term liberal means.[/quote]
I just looked it up in the OED: it means “a fucking idiot.”
[quote]jawara wrote:
<<<< Ayers has said “we didnt do enough”. I’ll let you figure out for yourself what that means.
Picture this:
Lets say you went for a job as a secret service agent, and they start doing a background check on you. Don’t you think belonging to an “I hate white people” church for 20 years, and being an associate of a guy that blow up buildings would get you disqualified? So in other words he couldnt even get a job to be his bodyguard. Shit he cant even find his own birth certificate these days.[/quote]
That is a brilliant point.
If he couldn’t pass the background check to stand post as a secret service agent how the hell could he qualify to be president which is well up the ladder from there?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
jawara wrote:
<<<< Ayers has said “we didnt do enough”. I’ll let you figure out for yourself what that means.
Picture this:
Lets say you went for a job as a secret service agent, and they start doing a background check on you. Don’t you think belonging to an “I hate white people” church for 20 years, and being an associate of a guy that blow up buildings would get you disqualified? So in other words he couldnt even get a job to be his bodyguard. Shit he cant even find his own birth certificate these days.
That is a brilliant point.
If he couldn’t pass the background check to stand post as a secret service agent how the hell could he qualify to be president which is well up the ladder from there?
[/quote]
In-fucking-deed.