Sarah Palin on the Obama/Ayers Connection
October 4th, 2008 at 05:56pm Mark Noonan
From NRO’s The Corner:
There’s been a lot of interest in what I read lately. Well, I was reading my copy of today’s New York Times and I was really interested to read about Barack’s friends from Chicago. Turns out, one of his earliest supporters is a man who, according to The New York Times was a domestic terrorist and part of a group that, quote, ‘launched a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol.’ These are the same guys who think patriotism is paying higher taxes. This is not a man who sees America as you and I do - as the greatest force for good in the world. This is someone who sees America as imperfect enough to pal around with terrorists who targeted their own country. This, ladies and gentlemen, has nothing to do with the kind of change anyone can believe in - not my kids and not your kids.
Now, that New York Times article is actually a bit of a whitewash - seriously asking us to believe that Obama and Ayers aren’t close. This is akin to taking the word of Lucky Luciano that Al Capone had only a little to do with bootlegging. Be that as it may, it is way past time that McCain/Palin started hitting upon the very things which make Obama entirely unfit to be President. In Obama’s advocacy of wrong policies, in his advocacy of the most fanatic pro-abortion positions, in his associations with various racists and anti-Americans is all we need to know about Obama - and, if known widely enough, will suffice to end his chances of being elected. Obama has spent the last 18 months trying to project an image of a post-partisan healer…when he’s actually a ignorant, vindictive ultra-leftist who wants to impose Euro-socialism upon the United States of America.
The American people will have the sort of government they prefer - but it is our duty to ensure that our fellow Americans have the most complete set of facts possible when they render their judgement. If, after the people know that Obama’s allies caused the mortgage meltdown, called for US defeat in war, want to impose government control over larger and larger aspects of Americans life, engaged all manner of corrupt activies - if the people know all that and still prefer Obama to McCain, then so be it; we on our side will then rest content with the knowledge that we did our duty…but to hold fire because Obama and his minions will accuse us of racism or of being mean? Nonsense - time to bring a howitzer to Obama’s gun fight.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Corruption, Democrats, Patriotism, Republicans
96 Comments
1. FactCheck | October 4th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
seriously asking us to believe that Obama and Ayers aren’t close
No, it’s merely pointing out the fact (you know…those things that you hate so much) that they weren’t close. But we know how you handle facts: You close your eyes, stick your fingers in your ears, and scream loudly. So you’ll just go on with your little fantasy camp and cry like a little child about how the big bad (Goebbels-like, right?) media is out to get you. It’s what you do best.
Also, it’s pretty sad that in the midst of all these actual problems, the best you wingnuts can come up with to do is to try to redo failed character assassination attempts. But then again, the GOP has nothing else to offer, so it’s rather hemmed in at this point.
2. CanadianObserver | October 4th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
There’s been a lot of interest in what I read lately. Well, I was reading my copy of today’s New York Times
————————————–
That’s funny. Her handlers are a bit slow on the draw. They should have had her reading the NYT before her interview with Couric. It’s a little late now to give her a newspaper name to brandish about.
3. kimberly4victory | October 4th, 2008 at 6:22 pm
Heil, Obama!! Yes, we can.
http://www.anorak.co.uk/category/politicians/barack-obama
4. yekepyt | October 4th, 2008 at 6:22 pm
It’s funny to hear Palin “name drop” the name of a newspaper to try to smooth over that blunder. Soon she’ll be casually dropping the names of important Supreme Court cases, too.
5. Danish Artist | October 4th, 2008 at 6:22 pm
Fart Check,
Facts please, not spin and invective.
Why is Obama downplaying this acquaintance as “some guy who just happened to live in my neighborhood and not someone who has endorsed him or talked to him regularly”, when it has been shown to be much more than that???
Why can’t he come clean and explain the relationship for what it really is rather than hide behind lies and distortion?? If it is as innocent as he claims, why is he down-playing it??
He can’t - Ayers introduced him at his home to the Hyde Park Community at the beginning of his political career (endorsement) and served on the board of a Chicago charity for THREE YEARS (did not talk to him regularly?)?
So Fart Check, why don’t you live up to your name and do some fact checking rather than blowing hot air out of your ass?
6. Some Assembly Required | October 4th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
The Evil MSM is bias I tell you BIAS! But check out this article in the NYT that’s about our opponent.
You can’t write this stuff any better. Maybe Matt Damon was onto something. Maybe McCain / Palin rent the Might Ducks series for strategy. Quack, Quack, Quack….
7. FactCheck | October 4th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
Facts please
OK, the facts are that there is no “deep connection” between Obama and Ayers, yet you guys keep trying to say that there is. How sad for you. Keep wallowing in spin and invective, though. It seems to be the only place where you’re comfortable.
I’m curious, though: Why do you hate facts so much?
8. Danish Artist | October 4th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
SAR,
Sounds like you bought some bad (expletive deleted)? Or, It’s time to clean the tar out of your bong!
Every hit you take causes you to suspend belief that much more. How can you live in the real world so disconnected from reality?
Then again, maybe you can live in the real world like your candidate.
9. Danish Artist | October 4th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
Fart Check,
How can I hate facts when you have presented - ZERO!!!
Why can’t Obama discuss his strictly professional relationship with Ayers? Also, the local Chicago media must have been lying about Obama’s start in politics.
Again, keep passing the hot air eventually even you may smell what you are shoveling.
10. liberalD | October 4th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
apparently Obama happened to meet this guy two times briefly 12 years ago on some school project. This was 12 years ago at a couple of meetings 20 years after he was in a radical group. its so a non-story. You know what is - absolute desperation. And fortunately the American people are smart enough to see what it is - plain desperation. Shameful acts by shame full people..
11. FactCheck | October 4th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
“Waaaah! Obama won’t say that this story we made up about him is true, therefore he’s engaging in a cover up! Waaaaaaah!”
Here’s a nice little clip from that same article Sarah Flailin’ is talking about:
Poor Danish Artist. So angry, so clueless.
PS: If that quote above has too many big words and makes your head hurt, just let me know, and I’ll try to dumb it down for you.
12. Mark Noonan | October 4th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Fact,
I’m going to have to insist you change your moniker to “Talking Points”, as its clear you’re a seminar poster from the Obama campaign sent to post the day’s talking points.
Obama launched his career with a fundraiser at Ayers house and has steered millions of dollars of government money to Ayers’ “education” projects. There is a long and strong working relationship between Obama and Ayers…and, furthermore, if there was even the most tangential relationship between McCain and a rightwing terrorist - even if he was repentant, as Ayers isn’t - then you’d be parroting a line about how this disqualifies McCain…
13. TalkingPoint | October 4th, 2008 at 7:31 pm
you’re a seminar poster from the Obama campaign sent to post the day’s talking points.
The typical Mark Noonan whine of defeat. Nice to see it’s so easy to get you to emit it.
There is, of course, nothing to your allegations. Stanley Kurtz tried and failed to make something of it. Now, the hated NYT has done the same thing. You seem to want to go for try-and-fail number three. But considering how you tend to do in arguments, failure is nothing new to you.
You have no facts to back you up (you usually don’t, but that’s a different story). You’ve repeatedly tried to come up with some sort of narrative here, but the best anybody has been able to do is a very pitiful attempt at guilt by association. But again, this is all you guys have left. You certainly don’t offer anything positive.
14. Joe Bananas..in Pajamas | October 4th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
“Birds of a feather flock together”
Regardless of how many times they met and at what level, the facts are that they did meet.
The questionable issue is Obama’s associations.
How utterly irresponsible and dangerous it has been to see the MSM and Democrat followers sweep these things under the carpet as though they were insignificant.
How utterly hopeless and pathetic is it when the entire MSM and Democratic party has offered the biggest fraud in US political history as a savior “Jesus” like persona.
The GOP should throw everything including the kitchen sink at this.
It’s about time that CNN and others are now starting to put this issue on the front line.
Even though they refuse to listen at least it’s getting some attention.
Sadly it has been up to Palin to attack on this and other issues.
McCain is nowhere to be seen ( again and maybe for the better since she gets coverage )
15. liberalD | October 4th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
Mark Noonan - this is just another shameful attempt to smear Obama. They are desperate for anything they can drudge up - his pastor, some one he met 10 years ago and did things 40 years ago that he had no connection to, trying to scare people with his middle name, etc, etc..
Shameful and despicable . How do you think your preist thinks of you now? How will you answer to god? Have you now shame at all Sir? Have you none left in you at all…
16. Mark Noonan | October 4th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
TalkingPoint,
Just for the sake of argument, let’s say that Obama didn’t have a close relationship with Ayers - given that Obama has called, post exposure, the actions of Ayers’ “despicable”, what does this say of Obama’s judgement? Either he failed the least bit of due dilligence and didn’t so much as “google” the name of the guy he was steering government swag to or, even worse, he’s just a cynical manipulator who figures that he’s got his TalkingPoint robots so convinced that they’ll swallow anything…
17. Mark Noonan | October 4th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
liberalID,
Nice try, but I’ll gather my judgements about myself from a more august source than a mind-numbed Obama-bot. You really should take a closer look at your own views - that you would defend a man with no accomplishments, a record a coward would be ashamed to have and associations with hate-mongers speaks volumes about either your own moral and intellectual failings, or about your own wickedness.
18. Some Assembly Required | October 4th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
“Regardless of how many times they met and at what level, the facts are that they did meet.”
Do I need to point out how rediciliously absurd this statement is?
“How utterly irresponsible and dangerous it has been to see the MSM and Democrat followers sweep these things under the carpet as though they were insignificant.”
I don’t know, maybe they just see it as a reasonable person would. Obama met him when he was 8. I’m sure you’ve played in the park with some children that grew up to be criminals, is it fair to convict or try you for their crimes as an accomplice?
The sad thing is in the same breath you will defend McCain against his Keating 5 allegations. Just to be clear, I don’t hold this against McCain, I merely using it as an example to point out how much of a hypocrite you are.
19. kimberly4victory | October 4th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
I really think Obama’s shady connection with Dr. Khalid al-Mansour is more damaging than his association with Ayres. But really, his judgement on most of the people he associates/associated with are pretty bad.
A man is judged by the company he keeps … and BO keeps very shady company.
20. Some Assembly Required | October 4th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
16. Mark Noonan | October 4th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
Your forgetting the third option. Maybe he just gave the man the benefit of the doubt.
It’s very christian like to forgive someone of their past sins if it’s apparent that they wish to change and put their previous life behind them. I thought this would especially resonant with you Mark but seeing as it has not it only further proves how much of a hypocrite you truly are and how much you use your religion as a tool to do your bidding instead of enhance your life.
21. Some Assembly Required | October 4th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
“A man is judged by the company he keeps … and BO keeps very shady company.”
What does it say about you if you strictly judge a man by the company he keeps? Everyone goes through phases in their lives and company tends to change accordingly. If we were to go back through your life and judge you on the precarious characters you have come across and paint you with that brush, would that be a fair testament to your character?
What about your accomplishments, life experiences, ambitions, family life, ‘Religious affiliation (for you wing nuts), etc… Are they meaningless compared to the company one keeps?
22. kimberly4victory | October 4th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Sorry, SAR, none of my friends or acquaintances have ever been terrorists or funded terrorism. My pastor has never said anything close to what Wright has said. I’ve never been friends with or been on a board with criminals.
I don’t think our future POTUS should be associated with anyone like that.
23. Dave | October 4th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Deleted - off topic.
24. Some Assembly Required | October 4th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Kim,
And if they had been I wouldn’t judge you on it. Especially if the terrorist has reformed his ways. I thought the whole idea was to show them how great America was in the first place. That way they wouldn’t want to attack us.
As for your friends and acquaintances, how would you know for sure? Have you been in contact with everyone you used to know from the age of 8 on recently?
25. Observer20 | October 4th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
SAR,
The reason why we have to do this guilt by association thing is because there’s nothing of large magnitude about him. He won’t release his voting records and school records, and many of the “accomplishments” he’s said to have achieved he actually stole from someone else or has blown up way out of proportion. The fact of the matter is his voting record is nothing special and completely partisan. In his time in the senate he’s only worked in a bi-partisan manner for goals Democrats wanted. He didn’t do much of interest when he was on the law review board of Harvard. Even in his two books it doesn’t really say anything about him.
When there’s nothing to know about the candidate himself, you have to rely on his company to define him. What would your first impressions of me be if you knew absolutely nothing about me but happened to see me hang out with members of Al’Qaida or the KKK and happened to be friends with corrupt politicians? I can guarantee you they wouldn’t be good. Now what if you saw me hanging out with that same group of people for twenty years, and then one day because someone said something I said, “Oops, my bad,” and hid in a corner. Would you trust me? I’d doubt it.
26. Some Assembly Required | October 4th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
Observer,
Sorry my friend, but Obama has been in the spot light for well over a year. His voting records have been public and he has co-sponsored bills with republicans including one on nuclear proliferation. He championed ethics reform in Chicago and well you know the rest of the talking points on his record.
Listen, the truth is he’s know where near as experienced as McCain, but he is accompished. Despite what you say about what he did as the president of the law review, simply becoming the president is a marvel in itself. It’s not something they just hand you. Writing two best seller books, not something everyone can do. As an aside, he made his fortune from that, he didn’t divorce and marry into it like McCain did. You want to talk character, you can’t forget that!
Even in his two books it doesn?t really say anything about him.
Writing two best sellers says a lot IMO. It at the least means he’s intelligent. Also, the fact that they are about his life are even more telling. Obviously he is a person with a fascinating character or his books would have flopped.
What would your first impressions of me be if you knew absolutely nothing about me but happened to see me hang out with members of Al?Qaida or the KKK and happened to be friends with corrupt politicians?
You make a good point. However, I consider myself to be a fairly decent human being. I don’t judge people solely on first impressions so I would like to know more. I would talk to you more, see where your motive are, as well as people who knew / heard about you. It is possible for people to be friends with people they do not see eye to eye on. Shoot, I’ve been friends with someone for going on 10 years who is a racist. He is a good fello, when he goes on rants I just shake my head and walk away. Mind you he never does it in front of anyone he may offend. I guess you could call him a considerate racist if theres such a thing. Anyway, my point is I’m friends with him because he is a decent fello and a good hand to have a few beers with. Sure he says things I flat out don’t agree with, but life would be boring if I hung out with people who agreed and believed in everything I did.
27. Joe Bananas..in Pajamas | October 4th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
SAR:
Sorry I don’t buy this “I was only 8 years old when he did those things”.
This is a clever Attorney like distraction from answering the question.
Obama may have been 8 years old, but Ayers certainly was NOT and in his adult mindset, by his own admission he was un apologetic and to all extent and purposes, un changed in his views.
This was no juvenile Ayers, this was a mature adult with extreme political views.
Obama has met him, and used his home to launch his run for the senate.
They also worked together to some extent, come on Ayers is Ayers.
No one is blaming Obama for what Ayers did when Obama was 8 years old.
But Obama is lying about his association with Ayers.
Obama cannot be trusted with the truth, he is not a Democrat with left leaning tendencies.
Obama is a left leaning Democrat with extreme Socialist tendencies and his association with Ayers betrays that fact.
I mentioned this before, When Obama told Bill O’Reilly that he had conservative friends as well, O’Reilly asked him to name one.
Obama could not name one, even when O’Reilly pressed him, Obama was stumped.
He is a liar, and you want to trust this kind of liar to be your president?
28. Joe Bananas..in Pajamas | October 4th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
SAR:
>>You make a good point. However, I consider myself to be a fairly decent human being. I don’t judge people solely on first impressions so I would like to know more. I would talk to you more, see where your motive are, as well as people who knew / heard about you. It is possible for people to be friends with people they do not see eye to eye on.>>>
Sorry my friend but when you are running for the highest office in the world, neither do you have that luxury, nor should you have a reasonable doubt hanging over your head.
Obama wants the top job then he has to be accountable to the highest standards and criteria that the position requires.
So far he has failed……
Oh, and get this, what makes it even worse, instead of providing evidence to refute claims against him, he goes out all legal to silence his critics.
Way to go Obama, nice socialist tactic like Stalins good little boy.
29. Observer20 | October 4th, 2008 at 9:02 pm
SAR,
Wasn’t it in the debates that it was pointed out that Obama supported nuclear energy but didn’t support storing and transporting the nuclear waste? How is that possible? And I know I’m really bad at this, but could you please provide a link the the bill that Obama tried to work with Republicans on nuclear power? Also define “Ethics reform.”
I will grant you that he has done one or two good things. I just don’t think that’s enough to go by. That there’s so much dirt and not so much not dirt is what makes me worry. Sure he got to be president of the law review, but so what? Are we now supposed to assume the best of him because of his positions? Does his position as president of Harvard law review and state and national Senator separate him from any guilt?
I know he’s intelligent, I just don’t think his heart is in the right place and his experience is limited. Writing two books about yourself doesn’t always reflect good qualities. For instance, it could also reflect that he’s a narcissist…
Now I would agree with you about first impressions. But your friends hasn’t preached openly his racist views, has he? And one of your other friends hasn’t been a known co-leader of a terrorist organization, has he? Would you still be friends with those people if they were? Would you call your racist friend a “mentor” and then decide to run for president? Would you expect people to not try to associate him with you if you still hung out with him?
30. Some Assembly Required | October 4th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
“Sorry my friend but when you are running for the highest office in the world, neither do you have that luxury, nor should you have a reasonable doubt hanging over your head.
Obama wants the top job then he has to be accountable to the highest standards and criteria that the position requires.”
And you support Sarah Palin for the Second Highest position in the world…. Thanks for playing.
31. Joe Bananas..in Pajamas | October 4th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
SAR:
>>And you support Sarah Palin for the Second Highest position in the world…. Thanks for playing.>>
Sorry, answer the question my friend, I’m not talking about VP I’m talking about the top job.
And what exactly have those gazzilion lawyers that were dispatched to Alaska found?
That’s right, nothing, zero, zilch.
Now how about for equality sakes we apply the same level of scrutiny on Obama who wants to be President?
Without the hissy fits and screams that’s all…..
Of course that will not happen, because Obama is hiding things that he knows people will not like.
32. TalkingPoint | October 4th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
a man with no accomplishments, a record a coward would be ashamed to have and associations with hate-mongers speaks volumes
No accomplishments, blatant cowardice, hanging around with hatemongers…do you always have to talk about yourself, Noonan?
33. Some Assembly Required | October 4th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
Observer,
First, I was referring to the Nuclear Proliferation bill. I just wanted to specify because I think you may have confused is with Nuclear energy (happens to the best of us).
You are correct in regards to the debate, however there is a facility being constructed in Colorado (I think) which is set to be operation by 2010 or 2012. This facility will house all the nuclear rods that are wasted. It’s been underway now for some years. I think Obama hinted towards that during the debate as well but it was in between McCain making one of his points. So supporting it or not it’s already being constructed. In any event Obama’s energy plan is far more comprehensive then McCain’s and also incorporates drilling.
If your going to go that route you might as well throw out McCain’s POW experience. I’m not going to get into a ‘but your guy did this’ with you. Both are politicians and both act as such. Both have changed things in their own ways and for me, Obama has taken a more rational approach on all the issues. If nothing else, the last fiasco where McCain wanted to cancel his campaign and suspend the debate to pass the bail out bill further proved that Obama clearly has the judgement and intelligence to lead this country.
Again, Ayers was a former terrorist in the 60’s or 70’s. He was tried and sentenced, the whole nine yards. A person can change and he now teaches at a university. If he was a danger to the US or still a terrorist he would still be in-prison. So, any dealings Obama has hand with him in his adult life would be after Ayers ‘converted’. Think of it this way, Bush is a born again Christian. He was a former alcoholic and drug user. Then one day he decided to change. You don’t judge him on who he once was today do you? What about the rest of the people on this site?
As for Rev. Wright, I hope your as equally outraged at Palin’s preachers and comments in church. Wright never said controversial things every sunday for 20 years. He said some things sometimes, but ask anyone who goes to church in the south, I’m will to bet dollars to donuts they will tell you they’ve heard their preacher say some pretty messed up things. yet they still go because it’s church and it’s sunday their day of worship. And because they’ve been going for years. Does that mean they believe every word their preacher says?
34. steinerla | October 4th, 2008 at 9:33 pm
neocon, k4b, spook, marine, noonan or any of you kooky cast of characters…how about a comment on Dave’s video…
35. Some Assembly Required | October 4th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Joe,
Your and idiot. There’s no way around it. I’m done debating you where you cannot form even a simplistic argument based in some form of fact.
36. Leo Pusateri | October 4th, 2008 at 9:43 pm
Ayers was non-repentant. Ayers himself said that he “didn’t do enough” terrorism.
You still want to invite him to your dinner party?
37. Leo Pusateri | October 4th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
BTW… it’s not that Obama just knew Ayers… It’s his pattern of associations; whether it’s Ayers, Wright, Rezko, whatever… do you see a common thread through those associations? Have one friend who’s a criminal? Accident. Have two friends that are criminals and or hatemongers? Coincidence. Have three friends that are criminals and or hatemongers?
Pattern.
Birds of a feather.
38. Some Assembly Required | October 4th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
Leo,
Yup. From what I hear he’s a fairly good lecturer. Fact is he’s not in jail and he’s no longer a terrorist. He did his time, justice prevailed and he was ‘rehabilitated’.
Keep beating that drum and nevermind the chips in the sticks. When they crack, you’ll have no one to blame but yourself.
39. Some Assembly Required | October 4th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
McCain has met with Hagee. Does that represent his character too?
40. Jeremiah | October 4th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
Association is very important in regards to the candidates running for President…
Now, just take for example … If I were to decide I need to hire somebody to help run my business…when I go searching for the helper do I hire just anyone, or do I find out a little bit about the person before I hire them?
I must find out what kind of life they have lived before I hire them.
What are some of the qualifications I should look for in someone whom I want to work for me?
1. Someone who is respectful, and mannerly.
2. Someone who is willing to work.
3. Someone who has had considerable schooling and/or experience in the line of work that I do.
4. Someone who is considerate of other employees and their positions of authority.
5. Someone who doesn’t expect more than what his/her allowance is.
But before all these, their past life should be the very first thing taken into consideration. Why? Because for one, the person applying for the job may have all the qualities of character and intelligence to perform the job but at the heart of that individual is a whole different way and may I say totally the opposite way of doing business than what is best needed for accomplishing the job for my benefit.
In this case, where we are about to elect someone to the highest office, these things must all be out on the table and in the open for everyone to see before we are to make a decision, because we as the body of Americans are whose doing the hiring. We’re hiring a candidate to work for us.
We don’t want Barack Obama hiring and owning the American people … he may be seeking to be hired, but with the recognition of these past associations with Obama, it is clear that he wants not only the highest office, but to own the American people after he’s received and won the American peoples favor - which is, by any other name corruption of the first order.
As Gov. Palin pointed out, Barack Obama’s associations are ones that if the American people vote him into office are willing to say that they favor his past of dealings with terrorists. In essence, if the American people do this, it is a sign of the times in which we live … What do you mean? What I mean is, is the effects of the liberal indoctrination within our schools for the past 60 years is beginning to show…and when I say “liberal” indoctrination, I am referring to the philosophy of PostModernism or Post-Structuralism…which is Obama’s message of “change” meaning change that is contrary to our Christian foundation …. PostModernism/PostStructuralism has much to do with Darwin’s theory of “evolution” with the notion that “evolution” is improving mankind…which has absolutely nothing to do with natural selection…Darwin used the concept of natural selection, but the two “evolution” and natural selection cannot be used in the same sentence together … Natural selection is a part of God’s plan, as He places limitations on all living things according to the abilities that he has pre-destined for them.
Evolution, on the other hand, has its basis in atheism, evolution as in many words and phrases is just another buzz word as there is only one thing that can change, and that is our mind…which is in principle - Free Will or Choice.
It’s in free will or how we use our ability to choose that determines how the choices made will benefit others and in turn how well the majority thrives after it is implemented.
The problem with the liberal mantra of “change” is that it does not benefit others because it says - “Don’t worry about anything, we’ll take care of you by sending you a “free” check each month, just sit back, relax, buy a few cases of beer…Don’t worry about it.”
In translating it, what is the impression you get? You don’t have to take any responsibility for anything except for when the government says you must move, you must move.
In essence, what it all really boils down to is - liberalism (PostModernism/PostStructuralism) is relegating deep thought down into the gutter, without regard to thought about what is truth…about what is right and wrong, because atheism says there is “no such thing” as truth, or right and wrong.
This is what Obama is hoping for, because what determines the outcome of the election will prove how well of an understanding of right and wrong people have, and as it relates to who should be our next Leader.
So, the bottom line is this … People should look at Barack Obama’s past associations and be able to say with a clear decision that he is not fit not prepared to lead, because of his connections with this terrorist Ayers and others of anti-Semitic, anti-American sentiments such as Louie Farrakhan, Jeremiah Wright and that other preacher who defended Jeremiah Wright and also Obama’s many association through campaign financiers overseas in the order of Hamas, Iranian sources and other etcetera. Period.
41. Some Assembly Required | October 4th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
Ayers also said ‘didn’t do enough’ (terrorism) in retrospect. As in looking back upon his life. So he’s changed but doesn’t think he did enough back then. Theres a huge difference though somehow (call me crazy) I don’t think you will understand that.
42. Observer20 | October 4th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
SAR,
Essentially, there are three kinds of bills. There’s the kinds Democrats like and support, there’s the kind Republicans like and support, and there’s the kind each side would be crazy to not support. That’s the kind of bill that didn’t garner much scrutiny and wasn’t really something either side would vote against. Didn’t it vote without that much of a hubbub? Obviously both sides can be “bi-partisan” on issues they both agree on. That’s the point. But Obama has yet to prove that he is not a brainwashed footsoldier of the DNC. McCain has voted AGAINST his party, that’s why he’s seen as an on and off maverick. When has Obama done that frequently?
I think both pretty much have the same energy plan. They both say at least they support all forms of new energy. If either becomes president I doubt they’d veto a bill that supports energy research or construction.
I try not to rely on McCain’s POW status as a qualifier for his greatness. I prefer to judge my candidates on what they do, not what positions they’ve held. One reason why McCain is so appealing is because we share many of the same interests. I’m fiscally conservative but socially liberal on a lot of issues except for gun control and some abortion issues. McCain mirrors many of these beliefs. Another reason why I’m attracted to him is because he doesn’t always vote along party lines, which says to me that he’s not afraid to go against his party if he thinks they’re wrong.
Yes, Ayers has been released from prison. However, he has not apologized nor regretted his actions. He’s stated on televised broadcasts that he’s not repentant of his actions. Therefore, I don’t believe he’s changed one bit, at least not the way he thinks. When he apologizes and repents for his actions and it seems like he means it then I’ll consider forgiving him.
And I’m willing to bet that Wright’s average preaching doctrine was not far off from that. If he did not consistently hold those views, he could have come on TV and said, “I’m sorry for what I said, I didn’t mean it.” Instead, he came on TV and defended the viewpoints he espoused that were so controversial.
That’s the difference between what we believe. You think Ayers is reformed, and I do not. You think Wright does not think or preach that way regularly, but I do.
43. Joe Bananas..in Pajamas | October 4th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Joe,
Your and idiot. There’s no way around it. I’m done debating you where you cannot form even a simplistic argument based in some form of fact.>>>
From you, I take this as a compliment, I know when an out and out liberal calls me an idiot that it strengthens my convictions.
44. Some Assembly Required | October 4th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
Observer,
Obama was against the Iraq war. How was that not against the DNC in 2003? Almost everyone was on board for that then. Also, your undermining his bi-partisan work now because both sides agreed on it? Your joking right? And McCain is a bi-partisan because he twists arms to get people to agree with his legislation where they otherwise wouldn’t?
As for their energy bills. McCain’s was non-existent up until about a month ago. He didn’t even have a link on his website to his plan. It basically consisted of Drill baby Drill and a gas tax holiday in the summer that flopped. From there, he’s essentially modeled his from Obamas (interesting hey).
I’m fiscally conservative but socially liberal on a lot of issues…
I agree with you here. However, for the social issues Obama defiantly has the edge. McCain’s healthcare plans are worse then bush’s. Again, Obama didn’t support the Iraq war. This was standing up to both parties at the time. Obama also will not take your guns away. He’ll further regulate them, yes, but he will not take them away. And well, abortion, it’s just better if we don’t go there because js and jeremiah will come in and hijack this thread. In the end, you vote with the candidate that best mirrors your beliefs. Of course you probably won’t agree with all of them, but you go with the one that stands for most of them, or at least the important ones.
“That’s the difference between what we believe. You think Ayers is reformed, and I do not. You think Wright does not think or preach that way regularly, but I do.”
This is where your wrong. I couldn’t tell you if Ayers was reformed or not. I can tell you he is no longer a terrorist. So it’s not a big deal with me.
Wright, neither of us has sat in the pews every sunday when he preached so it’s just speculatory about his controversial comments day in and day out but again, Obama is his own man who is not easily influenced (Again said no to Iraq) so I do not see it as a big deal. If you had video of him saying the government was responsible for giving black people AIDS, I’d completely agree with you. But he didn’t so I don’t hold him responsible for something someone he knows said.
45. Danish Artist | October 4th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
Sorry Fart Check, but the relationship with Ayers though professional is more than “some guy who just happens to live in my neighborhood and one I don’t regularly talk to”.
Again you have not explained why Obama just can’t seem to bring himself to explain the purely professional relationship. I never said he was in agreement with Ayers concerning his radical past. I question why the downplay and deceptions of a more than mere acquaintance relationship. His relationship was more than distant neighbors.
You still have not presented facts as I and others have. You continue to spew talking points. It is obvious that you cannot quote facts beyond the official Obama talking points. Why must you continue to evade the questions and the past facts that contradict your talking poiints???
Why is Obama afraid of his own past and needs an image makeover to run for President???
46. Observer20 | October 4th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
SAR,
Obama was not a member of the United States Senate until 2005, and by that time the popularity of the war was down. Therefore we will never know how he would have voted if he was actually held accountable for his statements. And yes, I don’t view voting on bills that everyone wants to be bi-partisan. For something to be noteworthy, it has to feature sacrifices on some side. That’s why McCain can say he’s reached across the isle. He has worked with Democrats on legislation his party was against. Has Obama?
I’ll grant you that in the past McCain’s energy policy was vague before and he may or may not have borrowed elements of it from Obama. As I said, he’s not entirely bad.
Obama didn’t really stand up to both parties because he was not a United States Senator. Ever since the popularity of the war has gone down it’s been the motto of the DNC that Iraq is a huge mistake. I’m going to say Kerry lost 2004 primarily because of the “voting for it before voting against it” issue. So, to capitalize on its current popularity, they needed someone who was against the war from the beginning. Some Illinois state senator who coincidentally got all of his Democratic Primary opponents knocked off the ballot due to technicalities. Obama has voted with his party 95% of the time, and I think the DNC is using the Iraq war as their trojan horse to get their agenda into the white house.
Now I think Iraq was a bad decision too. I think we should have waited for the intelligence to become more clear or not have gone in at all. But I don’t think we should have a time table for withdrawal because we have war fatigue.
Okay, I agree that Ayers isn’t a terrorist right now. Obviously Obama wouldn’t be able to hang out with him (except for in prison) if he were. But my point is that he still thinks in a way that justifies terrorism. What your saying is if we somehow caught Bin Laden and decided not to execute him and he somehow got out of jail, and a politician decided to work with him and donate money to his causes, you’d be fine with it because Osama isn’t currently committing terrorist acts?
I agree that it’s just speculation but my speculation comes from the belief that evidence points to Wright regularly preaching this. I also believe Obama is easily swayed by interest groups, as can be seen by his flip-flopping policies on gun-control and FISA among other things.
47. Some Assembly Required | October 4th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
Observer,
McCain has reached across party lines, can’t and won’t deny it. I’ve often stated I think McCain would have been a far cry from bush. However, the past couple of months he’s been shifting far right and the past couple of weeks with his bailout gimmick is nothing short of flabbergasting.
Point Taken on Obama not being in the senate in 2003. But I believe he did speak out against it.
I also have seen this coming with regards to the DNC. However, everyone thought Clinton was a shoe in for the nomination. Her campaign was only designed for super tuesday and when she didn’t win the majority of states like she thought well, it was pretty much over before it began. Regardless, this was the DNC’s election to lose before they even started vetting candidates. So was 2004 really, but they were stupid then and ran primarily on anybody but Bush. This year, republicans are actually trying to argue that Obama will be more of the same and McCain will be different. It’s absurd to the core.
I don’t believe it’s a fair analogy to use Osama bin laden, but I’ll put my two scents in. In Osama dropped his ways, I would want to talk to him and understand his ways. Who better to study and talk to then a former head of AQ. You’d learn a lot about operations and day to day activities. Also, if you think the FBI are not watching Ayers, your fooling yourself. Anything suspicious he may do or purchase would be flaged fast then an Arab gets randomly searched at JFK airport.
As for FISA (I’m still against that) and gun control. You call it flip-flopping, I could argue it’s voting against party lines.
48. Jeremiah | October 4th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
In the end, you vote with the candidate that best mirrors your beliefs.
Some Assembly Required,
I don’t vote according to my own conscience or beliefs … I vote according to truth, which is according to how God would have me to vote.
It just so happens that Obama is not how God would have me to vote.
49. kimberly4victory | October 5th, 2008 at 12:02 am
The PUMAs believe Obama met Ayers in college. They were both at/around Columbia around the same time. They think he got hooked up with him then, and Ayers is the reason he moved to Chicago.
“Ayers is a community organizer/radical/Alinskyite from Chicago. He goes and lives one block from Columbia, stirring up the radicals, at the same time Obama went there. Obama “can’t remember” where he lived or who his friends were for his entire college career?
Obama, who has never set foot in Chicago in his life, decides to up and move to Chicago to “community organize” out of the blue? Please. He followed Ayers there.”
50. Observer20 | October 5th, 2008 at 12:07 am
SAR,
I really don’t see how he has shifted further right in the past few months. Isn’t changing his energy policy a shift to the left? Isn’t he still more centrist on issues on environment control and gay rights? All I’ve seen him do is reinforce his beliefs in small government. And I don’t really think the suspending campaign thing was designed solely as a stunt, although I do wish he was able to accomplish more from it.
I think it depends on how you define “more of the same.” Democrats like to phrase “more of the same” as a Republican in office and taxes “for the rich.” Republicans like to phrase “more of the same” as more partisan voting and corruption.
Well, I’m only using Osama bin Laden to highlight a point. If you think terrorists in general can be trustworthy if they’re not currently performing terrorist acts, then shouldn’t that apply to all individuals? And I think it is important to interrogate terrorists, but I don’t think we can assume their mindset has changed because they’ve stopped actively pursuing terrorist activities. I never said I didn’t think the FBI was keeping tabs on Ayers. In fact, I think that may be one reason why he isn’t doing anything illegal right now.
I call his flip-flopping pandering to a larger demographic. I think he needed to fringe voters on the left for the primaries so he promised all the standard left-wing talking points. Then, after the primaries he knew he’d need to entice the more moderate Democrats or unhappy Republicans so he “switched” his policy. Now I know that McCain isn’t entirely guilt-free from this practice either, but I think Obama’s done it to a greater scale.
51. Jeremiah | October 5th, 2008 at 12:32 am
Obama doesn’t need to hide his past…that he’s taken the label of Democrat/liberal says everything one needs to know about him…as when liberal took over education in this country with their “Separation of Church and State” makes it clear that he is from the school of Socialism.. and we can see where that took Europe, it took the brave men and women of America to take them out of that bondage. Don’t be fooled by the nice smiles and friendly gestures of false hope that Obama puts on. It’s deceitful to try and think that Obama would be anything other than a disaster for this country.
If the devil knows you’ve found out his secret of deceit, then you can see from the reaction you get from liberals on here how he feels about that.
Obama has certainly been deceived, and is deceiving as we speak … something that the Bible says will happen in the last days.
Don’t let Obama deceive you!
52. bongoman | October 5th, 2008 at 1:51 am
Which is based on your belief system…
53. bongoman | October 5th, 2008 at 1:58 am
OOOOhhhh!!! The last days!!! Obama is the anti-Christ!!!
Your insane Jeremiah. Your shameful pronouncements based on blind faith are pathetic.
54. Jeremiah | October 5th, 2008 at 2:23 am
52. bongoman | October 5th, 2008 at 1:51 am
I don’t vote according to my own conscience or beliefs … I vote according to truth, which is according to how God would have me to vote.
Which is based on your belief system…
No, that’s just how it is.
If I’m standing on home-plate at Yankee stadium and crack one out of the park you can’t sit on the sidelines, watch me swing and hit the ball and then tell me it never happened. It’s as simple as that.
Now, you can try to tell others that it “never happened” but you know you’re telling a lie.
God is forever real. No denying it, but Satan has sure tried to get others to believe that He “is not.” and there sure is a heck of a lot of people who’ve taken Satan’s bait.
Obama is the anti-Christ!!! No, I didn’t say that…but I’ll bet you one thing, I bet he don’t know what the anti-Christ is…
The anti-Christ is anyone who professes to not believe in Jesus Christ…that’s why it was said, “there have been many people already come professing to be the anti-Christ and many more to come.”
Many people say that they believe in Jesus but not in God, but we know that is false belief, because anyone who rejects God rejects Jesus and vice-versa, because Jesus and God are One. ‘I and my Father are One’ :) Hallelujah!
55. bongoman | October 5th, 2008 at 2:39 am
Sorry Jeremiah, I’m an atheist. I find your evangelising pathetic and pitiful.
56. Joe Bananas..in Pajamas | October 5th, 2008 at 5:34 am
bongoman | October 5th, 2008 at 2:39 am
Sorry Jeremiah, I’m an atheist. I find your evangelising pathetic and pitiful.
Spoken like a true respectful shallow Liberal.
57. searp | October 5th, 2008 at 10:06 am
You know, this blog has become just pathetic. It long ago abandoned any pretense of trying to convince reasonably objective (you know, fact-based) people. It is now just a big anti-everything screed.
58. Some Assembly Required | October 5th, 2008 at 10:55 am
“I don’t vote according to my own conscience or beliefs … I vote according to truth, which is according to how God would have me to vote.”
So you try to rebut my point by saying you vote the way that God tells you to?!?!?!
You do understand that God is a belief right. I mean he’s not something tangible like your next door neighbor. Theres no imperical evidence that suggest he exists or that he doesn’t so to claim he does is a belief. Like wise claiming that he doesn’t is also a belief (a more rational one, but then I’m slightly bias where I do not believe in God myself).
So in trying to debate a pretty straight forward point which I assumed everyone would come to agree on you have proven yourself to be for lack of a better word a retard. Wait, I take that back, maybe you just have aspergers syndrome (look it up) so I probably shouldn’t poke fun considering it’s not something you could help.
59. Some Assembly Required | October 5th, 2008 at 11:11 am
Observer,
Choosing Palin was a huge step to the far right. He picked her to shore up the abortion / gay marriage / family values crowd that were not thrilled by him.
Then theres the typical right wing arguement of ‘redefining’ terms. ‘More of the same’ is simple really, the RNC platform = more of the same. The type of foreign policy where it’s us against the rest of the world = more of the same. Corruption in politics runs on both sides and in both campaigns. All politicians say they will eliminate it, some cut it back but non ever do. Then Bush is a republican president with an administration that is run ramped with corruption. If you wanted to eliminate this corruption in your own party you should have voted Ron Paul. It would have been a tough choice for me if it was between Ron Paul and Obama I know that much.
I never stated terrorist can be trustworthy. However it is important to get their perspective on things. They can provide key understanding of how they are created. For instance, Obama’s ideas of foreign policy (diplomatic approach and no meddling) could be attributed to lessons learned from the past. Looking at history and thinking how could a person harbor so much hate against us? What did WE do to cause this? I will tell you one thing, it’s not because we are free and they are not. If they wanted to be free they would rise up and fight there rulers, not us. I’m probably giving the wing nuts here fuel to call me anti-american with the above statement, but then most of them are anything by rational and reasonable so I say so be it.
For a major flip-flop when the country was watching I simply point to the bailout. First he was against it, then he was for it, then he stops his campaign and tries to cancel the debate saying he won’t show up unless an agreement is reached. Of course an agreement was almost reached until presidential politics got thrown into the mix. Then he shows up to the debate because ‘progress was made’ when in fact talks were falling apart. After the debate he gets on the phone and deals with the situation while slamming Obama for doing the same thing. Still want to compare flip-flops?
60. Rich | October 5th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
“Yup. From what I hear he’s a fairly good lecturer. Fact is he’s not in jail and he’s no longer a terrorist”
Would you let a man babysit your children if he could be described as “he’s not in kail and no longer a child predator”? Probably not.
61. Some Assembly Required | October 5th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Rich,
Ayers isn’t a pedophile or sex offender so I fail to see your point. He was accused of blowing things up, not touching little boys like catholic priests. Theres a big difference when looking for a baby-sitter.
62. steinerla | October 5th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Deleted - off topic.
63. hgovernick | October 5th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Say it ain’t fair, uh, Sarah, there you go again pointing backward. Now, doggone it, let’s look ahead and tell Americans what we have to plan to do for them in the future.
64. Joe Bananas..in Pajamas | October 5th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Obama’s ideas of foreign policy (diplomatic approach and no meddling) could be attributed to lessons learned from the past. Looking at history and thinking how could a person harbor so much hate against us? What did WE do to cause this? I will tell you one thing, it’s not because we are free and they are not. If they wanted to be free they would rise up and fight there rulers, not us.
Just shows how idiotic Liberals are and how little they know about the underlying cause of Islamic terrorism.
I’m probably giving the wing nuts here fuel to call me anti-american with the above
No, you are just a typical stupid Liberal.
65. kimberly4victory | October 5th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
If McCain was friends with, on a board with, or his campaign was assisted financially by a known terrorist, Liberals and the MSM would be shouting it from the rooftops. If McCain and this same American terrorist also ran a $50 Million project into the ground, we’d be hearing about it daily.
If McCain was a member of a racist, anti-American church for 20 years, Liberals and the MSM would be crying about it left and right.
If McCain had dealings with a criminal who is about to go to prison (and quite possibly will be singing like a canary this coming week - fingers crossed), the Liberals and the MSM would be talking it up every single day.
It’s just fine and dandy that the liberal’s extremely liberal candidate is found to have ties with a terrorist like Ayres, a criminal like Rezco, and a pastor like Wright. And why not? They were perfectly okay with our president committing adultry in the oval office so what’s a few bad judgements of character.
66. kimberly4victory | October 5th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Love the response from McCain camp:
The last four weeks of this election will be about whether the American people are willing to turn our economy and national security over to Barack Obama, a man with little record, questionable judgment, and ties to radical figures like unrepentant domestic terrorist William Ayers. Americans need to ask themselves if they’ve ever befriended an unrepentant terrorist, or had a convicted felon help them buy their house — because those aren’t smears, those are true facts about Barack Obama. —Tucker Bounds, spokesman McCain-Palin 2008
So liberals, have you? I haven’t.
67. HeyHey | October 5th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Deleted - off topic.
68. LaGrange | October 5th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
“It just so happens that Obama is not how God would have me to vote.”
God told me to vote for Obama.
69. Jeremiah | October 5th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
You do understand that God is a belief right.
No, He is only a belief if you do not believe … to me, He is all there is. The very same atoms that He breathed out we breathe in.
I mean he’s not something tangible like your next door neighbor.
He is more real than your next door neighbor … even you and bongoman recognize God, so you are not an atheist … matter of fact, there are no atheists. Everyone is without excuse from the things that are seen. This is the limitation that God places on us, as we are confined to the earth from conception to grave.
Theres no imperical evidence that suggest he exists or that he doesn’t so to claim he does is a belief.
Again, the proof is in the pudding, everything that you see, taste, smell, hear and touch is from God…even the atoms in your own body are from God.
Like wise claiming that he doesn’t is also a belief (a more rational one, but then I’m slightly bias where I do not believe in God myself).
And again, you say you don’t, but you do. The only way you could not believe in God is by not being born…but being that you were conceived and know acknowledge purpose in life, you have no excuses.
Satan knows there is a God…and it is we who determines whom we allow to work with our hearts…If we say, “Nah, I don’t believe in you God.” Then you work for Satan.
So in trying to debate a pretty straight forward point which I assumed everyone would come to agree on you have proven yourself to be for lack of a better word a retard.
Yeah, that’s fine.
Wait, I take that back, maybe you just have aspergers syndrome (look it up) so I probably shouldn’t poke fun considering it’s not something you could help.
Yeah, wait … supposing I do or did have AS, how would you truly feel about me?
When you tell me something like that, I think of two people … These two people were firm believers in eugenics and offing those whom they deemed “inferior” which would include people, whom as you claim like myself “retarded”, those with AS, African-American Blacks, Jews and so forth.
Hmmm …. seems to fit your agenda quite, does it not?
Oh, yeah, don’t forget to read Psalm 14:1
70. HeyHey | October 5th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
Hardly off topic as we are discussing the presidential candidates and their associations with people. It’s sad that my first post was deleted. Most of the above posts are not on topic but we are debating here right?
I’ll say it again ….
McCain was ‘close’ to Charles Keating. No doubt about it.
I don’t see much of a connection with Ayers and Obama but that is just me. If anyone could provide the bills and funds appropriated by Obama and siphoned to Ayers, please provide a link. Ayers committed a crime a long time ago, served his time, and was released. Obama has spoke out against his crimes. I don’t see a close relationship. The only thing I see here is the fact that Obama held a campaign fundraiser at his Ayers’ house which may or ,may not suggest a more intimate relationship. The rest is all hearsay propogated by the McCain camp.
I didn’t get a chance to chime in on the debate thread. I scored the debate Biden 10, Palin 9. Again, that just me.
71. kimberly4victory | October 5th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
I’m happy to report that Charles Keating did NOT bomb the Pentagon. He also was not part of a group that killed a policeman. Phew!
72. kimberly4victory | October 5th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
“I don’t see much of a connection with Ayers and Obama but that is just me.”
Well, gee, if you’d take your blinders off for one second, you would see.
73. HeyHey | October 5th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Ok, kim, I’ll bite..What is this deep connection between Ayers and Obama? Please provide a source. I see the campaign fund raiser as stated above. What else?
74. kimberly4victory | October 5th, 2008 at 7:25 pm
Stanley Kurtz has investigated this relationship extensively.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTgwZTVmN2QyNzk2MmUxMzA5OTg0ODZlM2Y2OGI0NDM=
75. kimberly4victory | October 5th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
Also, noquarterusa has great write ups on the connection:
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/10/05/how-did-ayers-make-obama-chair-of-the-chicago-annenberg-challenge/#more-5249
76. Casper | October 5th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Deleted - unsubstantiated allegations.
77. Talking_Point | October 5th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Deleted - complains about comment policy (and, if you’ll pay attention, you’ll note that a conservative comment just a little bit ago had an unsubstantiated allegation against Obama deleted).
78. Casper | October 5th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
Ok, how about this one:
“Notorious Watergate burglar G. Gordon Liddy is a McCain supporter. In fact, Liddy, who at one time plotted to murder a journalist, has been donating money to McCain for the past decade. Liddy calls McCain “a good, personal friend“. McCain has appeared on Liddy’s radio show. and McCain’s website provides call-in info to Liddy’s show, asking supporters to contact the ex-con.”
79. Some Assembly Required | October 5th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
69. Jeremiah | October 5th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
Man, I’ve seen some pretty stupid things said but this post has got to top the cake.
God exists because I was born? Here I was thinking this was this tiny wiggly white thing that went into and egg.
I know it probably goes without saying, but for anyone reading this post is from a person from the far right. A person who the republicans consider their base. Does this not raise questions with any rational educated American? For Christ sake the man cannot distinguish between two beliefs that are on the opposite side of the same coin. Theres a reason why people ask ‘Do you believe in God?’ or ‘Do you have faith in something greater then yourself?’. Why am i even bothering Jeremiah is one nut job. Shoot, when that guy shoot up that church because it was too liberal I willing to bet 85% of the people posting here thought it was him.
80. HeyHey | October 5th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Purely speculative kimberly, any solid evidence of a deep connection or just hearsay?
Again, what did Obama appropriate in funds to Ayers? Provide some proof for once…
81. Jeremiah | October 5th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
‘Do you believe in God?’
SAR,
God does not care if you believe in Him or not. *chuckles* God has all power and authority … so He won’t be lectured by anyone. lol.
One thing that God certainly does do, and that is He loves you.
The real question is this … How much do you care that God loves you? Do you love God?
82. Ricorun | October 5th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
kim4whatever: I’m happy to report that Charles Keating did NOT bomb the Pentagon. He also was not part of a group that killed a policeman. Phew!
Gosh, that is a happy report. That makes what Keating did so much better. Phew! And never mind the liability caps erstwhile imposed on various death scenarios. After all, dead people should only be worth so much, right?
83. Jeremiah | October 5th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Deleted - juuust a bit over the top.
84. cam | October 5th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Jerimiah,
Your comments are more ridiculous than ever. Perhaps you can indicate quite simply what the charges would be and then present the evidence to support the charges.
Further, what is clear is that Palin has to run from the real issues which are of major concern to Americans. Maybe she can get a talk show if this gig doesn’t work out. No need for real facts there, just mere unfounded accusations is all that is needed to get good ratings.
85. Joe Bananas..in Pajamas | October 5th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
Hey Hey:
I don’t see much of a connection with Ayers and Obama but that is just me.
What the danger here is, that Obama shares the sentiments of an anti American ( hypocrite by the way )
A pattern of association (even if they were brief ) with dubious characters is not befitting a Presidential nominee.
These are not one off, pass in the side walk encounters.
But this does not bother most modern day liberals, because somehow they have all fallen ill with the same Anti American sickness.
86. Jeremiah | October 5th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
Deleted - also juuust a bit over the top.
87. Some Assembly Required | October 5th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
Deleted - off topic.
88. Observer20 | October 5th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
SAR, in reply to post #59,
You imply he chose Palin because of her beliefs. I believe he chose Palin because of her track record of going against corrupt elements of her own party. If McCain choosing Palin makes him shift to the right, does Obama choosing Biden shift him to more of the same politics as usual? After all, he has been in the Senate for longer than McCain.
Second, a term is a term and can only be defined in a set number of ways. Therefore, both their views on more of the same are valid. Just because Obama had a monopoly on the “more of the same” mantra doesn’t mean it’s absolutely correct and trumps any other associations. You say more of the same is RNC platform, and I say more of the same is the DNC platform. Obama’s shown himself to be more alligned with the DNC platform than McCain is with the RNC platform. And, to preempt any allegations you make about how it’s the Bush administration’s fault we’re in this mess, I can also point out how the Democrats have had a majority control of Congress for the past two years and this is currently happening on their legislative watch.
Yes, all politicians say they are against corruption, I just simply believe McCain. Obama is a typical politician as well who promises many things but I believe will accomplish few of those promises. Every Democrat wants to raise taxes, but people don’t like taxes so they use the appeal of only taxing the successful people. Do you think that’s completely accurate? I think it’s baloney. Obama’s flip-flopped on several issues and you do not know which “promises” he will keep, the ones before or after the switch.
I believe it is important to examine terrorist perspective as well, but I think we all know why they do what they do. First they are exposed to the culture of the United States and the western world, and that culture disagrees fundamentally with them on several key issues. Then, according to their ideology, they believe that it is simply not right for anybody to act in a way that is different from their ideological views, and decide that it is up to them and their cause to change the world the way they want it. This thought process could or could not be encouraged by intergenerational teachings of intolerance paired with propaganda and misrepresentation of western causes. This is a war of ideologies, and we have to tame or eliminate the extreme, violent thought processes, not just the terrorists themselves.
They don’t hate us because we’re free, they hate us because we’re different. You can try to make the argument that us being involved in the middle-east only encourages terrorism, but that quickly leads down the slippery slope of advancing isolationist positions in an ever expanding global market. That’s not wise. And that’s why Obama being associated with Ayers not only goes contrary to all that we believe in, but also undermines the efforts against terrorist groups like Al’Qaida. What message does it send to them when we decide to potentially elect someone who has close ties to an individual from a terrorist group while at they same time hunting down a different one?
The way I see it is that McCain was against the bailout, but since the rest of Congress didn’t want to discuss other options very seriously he had to go along so some deal could be reached. People saying he is a hypocrite because he voted for a bill with pork in it are blind. Do they have any idea how many bills with pork in it are passed through Congress each year? He can’t vote against them all, and he has to vote for the some of them just so something can be done. He may be anti-pork, but he’s not about to vote against a bill regarding civil rights or something because someone wants to donate $1,000 to a toy company.
And wait, what’s this about a deal almost being reached until the presidential candidates got on board? Got any proof for that statement or is that conjecture? And it was my impression that McCain “slammed” Obama by indicating his campaign took precedence over working on the bill.
89. Jeremiah | October 5th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
Deleted - off topic.
90. Talking Point | October 5th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
Deleted - off topic.
91. Some Assembly Required | October 6th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Observer,
It’s been a good debate but I fear we are just going in circles. We stand on opposite sides and hold essentially the same beliefs regarding separate candidates. However we can find common ground and award each candidate their dues. I think that by definition would constitute bi-partisanship. It’s good to know there’s a couple fairly objective and rational people on this site.
Fact Check,
Jesus was actually brown in color and probably would have been about 5′0″ tall. Judging from human history. Keeping in mind the average height for roman soldiers was only about 4′5″. I’ve never gotten this depiction of a white Jesus born and raised in Jerusalem. I guess it could happen though very unlikely.
Jeremiah,
Thanks for proving my point yet again. The sad part is you don’t even realize your doing it.
92. Jeremiah | October 6th, 2008 at 12:10 am
Deleted - off topic.
93. Some Assembly Required | October 6th, 2008 at 12:19 am
Deleted - off topic.
94. Some Assembly Required | October 6th, 2008 at 12:20 am
Deleted - off topic.
95. Tim | October 8th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
For those of you on this forum who think Sarah Palin is a great woman, your all dilusional. To go on TV and state Obama is a Terrorist is insane. Think about it…would he still be a senator if he was a terrorist? Would he be able to fly commercially if in fact he was even thought of as being a terrorist?
The rational answers to these questions is of course not. Palin and McCain are on a desperate course to try and salvage a cluster &^%! of a campaign.
If anybody has something to hide it’s Palin. Blocking a investigation into wrong doings as Governor, stating the investigations is “Illegal”. Give me a break! What about her connections with the Alaskan Independents. What about McCain and The Keating 5…he was cleared…so what, he was involved.
These personal attacks are coming hot and heavy because McCain and Palin have NO ANSWERS for the problems facing our economy, which was evident in the debate last night.
In another 28 days Palin can go back to Governing all those Polar Bears and having teas with whatever friends she has left. If I were Palin I’d consider the possibility of not getting re-elected Governor when her terms up, because her actions and the way she is carrying herself is horrendous
96. Howard | October 9th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
First Obama claims that over a TWENTY YEAR period, he never heard a single anti-American racist sermon from Jeremiah Wright … never noticed the anti-American racist literature in the church’s lobby … never agreed to the ‘Black Values System’ that all the church members swore to … never subscribed to the Marxist ‘Black Separation Theology’ espoused on the church’s website … never knew anti-American racist Louis Farrakhan, who the church awarded a life time achievement award to … and, never knew unrepentant terrorist William Ayers, when Obama launched his campaign from Ayer’s living room, sat on a board together, and whose wives worked at the same law firm. Obama also worked with Acorn, who has been caught in massive voter fraud, in behalf of Obama. Obama obviously shares an anti-American racist, and criminal philosophy with some very unsavory people, continues to lie about it, and does not have the character, or integrity to be President of the United States of America !!!