We called out the lack of media coverage on Obama’s friendship with William Ayers of the radical terrorist group from the 1960’s called the Weather Underground over a month ago. Until last night’s debate the media coverage was almost zero, with the exception of Fox News’ Sean Hannity. However, Obama was finally cornered with the question at last night’s debate by George Stephanopoulos. His answer was very lacking, and quite revealing on how radical his thinking is. In his attempt to spin, he actually compared his friendship with a terrorist to his friendship with Republican Tom Coburn.
The left side of the blogosphere are reacting to ABC actually asking tough questions by calling for shutting down free speech.
It’s time to shut FOX news network down, revoke their broadcast license, force them into bankruptcy, and deport Rupert Murdoch back to Australia.
The above is just one example of their reactions. Perfunction has a great roundup.
As a result of last night’s question, the media are finally starting to cover the topic. It is a major story in the New York Times, Politico, the New York Post, and the left wing Guardian in Great Britain. It is the most curious of all Barack Obama’s problematic relationships and calls into question not only his judgement but the core of his political beliefs.
Rick Moran has a great post that asks the questions the media need to dig into. He concludes:
This information along with the fact that Obama served with Ayers on the Board of the Woods Foundation, gives the lie to Obama’s claim that he doesn’t know Ayers very well. And both of those forums at U of C were set up by none other than Michelle Obama in her capacity as University of Chcago PR executive; evidently she too saw nothing wrong in glad handing with terrorists. Granted, much of the new coverage by the media is no more than spin and defense of Obama, but I guess its a start. At least people are being informed enough to start questioning.
It is beyond belief that the press is just now getting around to this, the most incredible of all Obama radical associations. And the scary thought is that it will change few minds about Obama and his hypocritical brand of “new politics.”
Indeed.
—John Stephenson is editor of Stop The ACLU.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I keep sayin'...
April 17, 2008 - 18:39 ET by Army BratYou CAN judge a person by the company they keep....
Happy Trails...
40 yrs ago vs a pardon
April 17, 2008 - 20:08 ET by docbPresident Clinton pardoned to members of the Weatherman Underground ... and then she was all for going to commercial break.
What? Hillary? No comeback for that?
Well gee docb...don't
April 17, 2008 - 20:15 ET by bigtimerWell gee docb...don't forget the pardons for 16 I think it was FALN members by the Clintoon Brigade for her vote getting in NY.
It's your party, cry if you want too.
LOL..
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
Is this really relevant?
April 17, 2008 - 18:42 ET by balboaIs this really relevant? There seems to be a very tenuous connection between the two men at best.
The relevance stems from the
April 17, 2008 - 18:44 ET by BDThe relevance stems from the fact that if a conservative was in some manner connected with such a personality or even less, there would be hell to pay.
Case in point, Do you recall the polite comments made by Trent Lott ref a retiring senior senator?
Big Difference
April 17, 2008 - 20:20 ET by the curatorFirst, I don't believe this in an instance where you can speculate on what would happen if Mr. Obama had a "R" after his name instead of a "D" (which is what you're doing - speculating. And speculation can't be regarded as fact).
I'm not up on the association of Mr. Obama and Mr. Ayers... but, I remember the comments Sen. Lott made on the late Sen. Strom Thurmond...
"When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over the years, either." - Sen. Trent Lott
Since Thurmond ran a campaign based largely on a racial segregation platform, Sen. Lott was accused of inferring that we as a nation should have stuck with segregation.
Personally, I don't believe that's what the Sen. meant to imply - but, justifiably so, it looked bad and he had to resign as leader.
Now, Sen. Obama deserves to be asked about his association with a known terrorist - no matter how long ago his terrorist activities took place.
But, putting a man's (possibly loose) ties with someone who did some bad sh*t decades ago isn't quite on the level with the preceived advocation of segregation.
IF Obama is shown to have a tight tie with this man... that's one thing.
But, I have friends I don't agree with. I have a close family member in prison whom I love... though I obviously don't agree with what they did.
So, just because Obama is friends with a bad person does not make HIM a bad person.
Sen. Lott, however, made an indirect advocacy for segregation. Implying he was BOTH Sen. Thurmond's friend and ideologica equal on that issue.
That's the difference.
This is all IMO.
I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building."
-George W. Bush, October 11, 2000
curator: It's becoming more
April 17, 2008 - 21:10 ET by QueenMumcurator: It's becoming more and more obvious that Obama cut his political teeth among radical leftists. I'm all for giving someone the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their personal lives, but Obama's personal life has clearly revolved around those who could benefit his political aspirations. And in his elite naivete, he thought that the "average American" would never be the wiser. All politics may be local. But when it comes to Chicago politics, the history speaks for itself.
I am the exotic Queen Mum, and I approved this message.
Agree, to a point
April 17, 2008 - 21:48 ET by the curatorI agree his association with this person needs to be explored.
That said, nothing has been proven yet. And even you said, you believe in giving someone the benefit of the doubt.
I think Obama still should have that until 1 - it's shown these two have a close relationship... and 2 - he shares his beliefs.
Again, I'll bring up my brother. In prison for years for a serious crime... but, I still love him.
Sometime we can strongly disagree with the choices and positions of our friends and loved ones (God knows that happens every time I talk politics with my friends).
But, I'll concede, every detail (even about your friends) is magnified when you're running for the highest political office in the world. (Again, why I have no problem with checking into their relationship)
"I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building."
-George W. Bush, October 11, 2000
You have a familial
April 18, 2008 - 16:59 ET by BDYou have a familial relationship with your brother. No such relationship exists with a known terrorist which by his own admission, Mr Ayers IS!
Let me just say that if I were placed in a room or on a panel with Mr Ayers, I would NOT be "Friendly" as Mr Obamas staff says he is with Mr Ayers.
Given the option, I would put him in jail for his past crimes if not executed summarily which he richly deserves.
"First, I don't believe this
April 18, 2008 - 17:02 ET by BD"First, I don't believe this in an instance where you can speculate on what would happen if Mr. Obama had a "R" after his name instead of a "D" (which is what you're doing - speculating. And speculation can't be regarded as fact)."
Actually, specualtion is key to forming COA. We know enough about Mr Ayers, Chicago Politics, and the MSM to know that if he espoused causes such as tax cuts, greater defense spending, and ending legalized abortion - and Mr Ayers had a relationship with a neo Nazi group, then Mr Ayers would be hanging around his neck like a lead weight.
Example:Let us say that it
April 18, 2008 - 17:09 ET by BDCurator...
Example:
Let us say that it is released that John McCain sought to serve on a board with Lyndie Englund of Abu Ghraib infamy.
Now let us imagine that McCain's Chief of Staff said that the Senator had "A Friendly relationship" with Ms Englund.
Do you think the MSM would not run on the front page with this?
And, in my opinion, Ayers is worse than Englund.
Shack!!!...Curator busted.
???
April 18, 2008 - 17:52 ET by the curator"Shack?" Ummm... ok?
You're free to think the media would run the hypothetical McCain/Englund story.
But, again... that's speculation. To pass that off is fact is simply not plausible. That's what makes it 'speculation.'
And, "Curator busted"? I don't know for whom you're showing off... but, well done.
"I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building."
-George W. Bush, October 11, 2000
So, you are a hardliner on
April 18, 2008 - 18:28 ET by BDSo, you are a hardliner on speculation? Then naturally you will not vote in the next election because to select a candidate based on the information gathered during simple campaigning is "Speculation."
At some point, in the intelligence game (My profession) you must take what has been collected, then processed and thus KNOWN and then come to a decision.
We know enough of the press, their attitudes and past performance, and desires to come to certain conclusions. Those conclusions naturally include the assumption that they would treat a conservative worse than a liberal.
For info purposes ..."SHACK" is the cry of joy I usually hear over the radio net when a strike pilot hits and in his "Estimation" completely destroys the target.
Ahhh
April 18, 2008 - 18:43 ET by the curatorSo, you are a hardliner on speculation? Then naturally you will not vote in the next election because to select a candidate based on the information gathered during simple campaigning is "Speculation."
I believe you're confusing 'speculation' of facts as they pertained to an argument and/or discussion... and 'hope' that the candidate I choose (which could well be McCain) will do the job I hope they're capable of.
in the intelligence game (My profession)
Cool. That's my profession, too. I'm a journalist. What do you do?
Those conclusions naturally include the assumption that they would treat a conservative worse than a liberal.
If that's the case, then why did the media roast President Clinton of the Monica Lewinksi trial? Surely if the media were in his corner, they woulnd't have done wall-to-wall coverage on the cables... and lead the evening netwark newscasts every night.
But, they did. Do you have an explanation for that?
"SHACK" is the cry of joy I usually hear over the radio net when a strike pilot hits and in his "Estimation" completely destroys the target.
How very Marvel Comic of you.
Thankfully, I'm still here and haven't been reduced to rubble. Either I'm more sterdy than I thought... or your aim and 'estimation' was off.
"I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building."
-George W. Bush, October 11, 2000
I believe you're confusing
April 18, 2008 - 19:17 ET by BDI believe you're confusing 'speculation' of facts as they pertained to an argument and/or discussion... and 'hope' that the candidate I choose (which could well be McCain) will do the job I hope they're capable of.
No. All decisions are effectively made via what might be termed speculation. NOTHING is hard and fast enough to not have speculation involved in it.
"in the intelligence game (My profession) Cool. That's my profession, too. I'm a journalist. What do you do? "
Sadly, I am a school trained journalist who put himself through school working as a broadcast journalist at an NPR associated Public Radio Station.
After four years of that I joined the US Army, served in the infantry and then became a Military Intelligence Officer which I still am.
While there are some MINOR similarities between journalism and Intelligence gathering, they are rare and reside solely in the collection phase. But whereas we are trained to be apolitical and not allow our personal desires intrude, this cannot be said of the journalistic profession.
In my Freshmen year of Journo school, I recall my old Dean asking the gathered mob of youngsters if they wished to become journalist to "Make a Difference." When most raised their hands in affirmation he informed them that that was not what journalism was about. It SHOULD be about the dispassionate collection and dissemination of information, but in my experience it is NOT.
"If that's the case, then why did the media roast President Clinton of the Monica Lewinksi trial? Surely if the media were in his corner, they woulnd't have done wall-to-wall coverage on the cables... and lead the evening netwark newscasts every night."
It only led the news because other sources (Talk radio, conservative publications notably) were covering the story and the press was shamed into full coverage significantly later.
I disagree
April 18, 2008 - 19:43 ET by the curatorwhereas we are trained to be apolitical and not allow our personal desires intrude, this cannot be said of the journalistic profession.
I, along with everyone I went to J school with... and every collegue I've ever had, has never carried one political agenda into any story I've seen or read.
Sadly, I am a school trained journalist who put himself through school working as a broadcast journalist at an NPR associated Public Radio Station.
I don't know why you say 'sadly.' It's laudable you put yourself through school and NPR is a fantastic organization.
After four years of that I joined the US Army, served in the infantry and then became a Military Intelligence Officer which I still am.
Thank you for your continued service.
It SHOULD be about the dispassionate collection and dissemination of information, but in my experience it is NOT.
There are many different goals of journlism. Slanting opinion should never be one of them. (and that happens much more rarely than the general public believes).
I've had experiences where the stories I've done have had overwhelming effect on people.
I did a story on teenage suicide... after which the doctor I worked with told me three kids called for help after they saw the story. Making a difference is a great goal.
Reporting politically... the press were given many freedoms in our constitution as another check-and-balance. Framers wanted the unabeited press so they COULD dig up dirty laundry. I applaud any journalist who digs up injustice or scandal.
But, swaying public opionion on subjective matters... not our job.
It only led the news because other sources (Talk radio, conservative publications notably) were covering the story and the press was shamed into full coverage significantly later.
I disagree completely. I certainly didn't cover the Clinton scandal because I felt pressure from conservative forces.
But, you feel and remember things differently. I respect that.
"I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building."
-George W. Bush, October 11, 2000
balboa: IMO, the connection
April 17, 2008 - 19:03 ET by QueenMumbalboa: IMO, the connection is far from tenuous.
Note in particular: "The relationship with Ayers gives context to his recent past in Hyde Park politics. It’s milieu in which a former violent radical was a stalwart of the local scene, not especially controversial.
It’s also a scene whose liberal ideological features — while taken for granted by the Chicago press corps that knows Obama best — provides a jarring contrast with Obama’s current, anti-ideological stance. This contrast between past and present — not least the Ayers connection"
I am the exotic Queen Mum, and I approved this message.
Tenuous connection?
April 17, 2008 - 19:25 ET by Humblepie"While Ayers and Dohrn may be thought of in Hyde Park as local
activists, they’re better known nationally as two of the most notorious
— and unrepentant — figures from the violent fringe of the 1960s
anti-war movement." Politico.com
This suggest that everyone in Chicago knows about Ayers.
"there’s no evidence their relationship is more than the casual
friendship of two men who occupy overlapping Chicago political circles
and who served together on the board of a Chicago foundation." Politico.com
Casual but served together on a board. That suggest he might not be drinking buddies, but knows him better than most.
"the couple has been embraced, by and large, in the liberal circles dominating Hyde Park politics. " Politico.com
If your running on a liberal agenda this circle is your life.
“Bill Ayers is one of my heroes in life,” said Sam Ackerman, a longtime
local activist. “I knew Tony Rezko, and he ain’t no Rezko.” Politico.com
Or, try this link for info on his association with the "Woods Fund."
http://dancingfromgenesis.wordpress.com/2008/03/22/muslim-plo-shiite-connections-barack-obama-william-ayers-weather-underground-woods-fund-chicago-arab-american-action-network-rashid-khalidi-columbia-university-invited-iran-president-ahmedinejad-ralli/
His whole life is relevant. Unlike most, we actually want to know how they were raised and who mentored them. You actually may get an idea into their agenda that way. To continue to state that his connection with Ayers is tenuous at best shows an unwillingness to search for the truth.
During this time with political correctness at its zenith, I reserve the right to let you know you're an idiot.
Humble: We need more
April 17, 2008 - 19:44 ET by QueenMumHumble: We need more investigation and public disclosure of the political and social connections of Barack Obama, specifically in and around Chicago. His true radical ideology is becoming more and more apparent. And it's getting more and more difficult for him to maintain his pleasant facade.
I am the exotic Queen Mum, and I approved this message.
re: Is This really relevant?
April 17, 2008 - 20:33 ET by geoff.galeBalboa, the relevance is that Obama has surrounded himself with people who have notoriously bad attitudes about America.
Look at what has been uncovered so far - Rev. Wright; William Ayers; Michelle Obama; Rashid Khalili (Islamist supported by the Woods foundation while Obama and Ayers were on the board together); Tony Rezko. Obama spoke at a UIC event that was sponsored by his wife and Ayers and his wife, Bernadine Dohrn were speakers at that event, along with Obama. Their kids are in the same school and they live in the same neighborhood.
It's clear that Obama realises the import of this relationship, that's why he described Ayers last night as "just a college professor", trying desperately to minimise what he knows about Bill Ayers.
The question is relevant because it's these relationships along with what the candidate says, publicly and privately that make up the totality of who the man is. To paraphrase HRC, "he's more than just some lofty speeches". If he has a history and a habit of surrounding himself with anti-American people, then you have to surmise that he is, at the very least, very tolerant of anti-Americanism. Is that what we need as a leader?
You yourself are judged in much the same way, like it or not. Remember how your mother told you to not hang around with the wrong crowd? What's happening to Obama is is part of why she said that. Obama has to stand up and clarify all of these relationships because they reflect choices that he has made and those choices say something about him and his values. That is the relevance.
"All that is necessary for the trimuph of evil is that good men do nothing."
- Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)
www.conservativeboot...
Much better now
April 17, 2008 - 20:59 ET by HumblepieNow that I've had time to sit back and drink a beer while cleaning my gun and browsing through the Bible, I feel much better.
I do think its funny that the press (print/tv) vetted every Republican candidate with the flimsiest of possible misdeeds. Thereby in effect, allowing the most liberal non-electable candidate to run on the Republican ticket.
Now, their messiah is screwing the pooch every turn he gets and making a total mockery of the democratic process. In effect, the dims will be electing the one person they knew would not ever win on his own. Congrats, and keep drinking that kool-aid please.
During this time with political correctness at its zenith, I reserve the right to let you know you're an idiot.
I do think its funny that
April 17, 2008 - 21:59 ET by the curatorI do think its funny that the press (print/tv) vetted every Republican candidate with the flimsiest of possible misdeeds. Thereby in effect, allowing the most liberal non-electable candidate to run on the Republican ticket.
You're insinuating the only reason McCain is going to win the nomination is because of the alleged liberal media.
No. McCain is winning because the current president isn't running against him.
You'll remember, McCain was winning in the 2000 primaries until, I believe, South Carolina campaigning. (it may have been Georgia).
Anyway... that's when phone polling was used asking fixed questions... the question to potential voters being "Would you vote for John Mccain if he had a bi-racial baby out of wedlock?"
Of course peopel took this to mean he actually did... or at least the thought was in their mind.
Its never been proven this was Bush's work... but, its widely suspected.
Id say lack of that type of opposition... and not the alleged liberal media... is responsible for his assention.
That, and he's a great campaigner who appeals to the American independents.
"I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building."
-George W. Bush, October 11, 2000
Caught up in your own hype?
April 18, 2008 - 16:08 ET by HumblepieMay I suggest some light reading for you, try this;
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2008/01/18/tobacco-taxes-sunk-mccain-2000-s-c-primary-not-dirty-tricks
Then there's always the story about how a John McCain's advisor met with the Kerry camp in an attempt to switch parties and run as Kerry's VP.
During this time with political correctness at its zenith, I reserve the right to let you know you're an idiot.
Seriously?
April 18, 2008 - 18:15 ET by the curatorYou direct me to a blog from a person of this website to prove to me that the phone polling didn't sink McCain in 2000?
First - you directed me to a conservative blogger.
Second - it wasn't even a journalists article.
Mr. Shepherd would never cite those phone polls as the reason for Sen. McCain's demise because it would reflect poorly on the president.
It's commonly accepted that McCain began losing steam in GA or SC after these phone polls were made.
"I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building."
-George W. Bush, October 11, 2000
There seems to be a very
April 18, 2008 - 17:14 ET by motherbeltThere seems to be a very tenuous connection between the two men at best.
Tenuous....at best???
They held an organizational meeting for Obama's Illinois Senate run at Ayers' home. You don't do that for a guy you only see in the post office once in a while.
Lets see, Obama did badly
April 17, 2008 - 19:10 ET by bigtimerLets see, Obama did badly last night, he was called out on this relationship finally regarding a terrorist like Ayers adn the leftist namby pamby babies want all speech shut down unless it is theirs....
too funny.
Now we have Obama whining too...says he may not take part in any other debates....boo hoo...he had better figure on being in other debates if he wins the leftists nomination.
Fun fun fun...
I'm glad for Hannity, he has been trying to get this covered by the rest of the press for a year...they have intentionally ignored it for a year.
Gibson and Stephie did a good job for abc for a change....something the rest of the leftist msm seems to be unable to admit...after-all they had pro easy questions for Obama most times...now their new messiah gets faced with rough sailing and he can't handle it.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
Congrats ABC, for FINALLY
April 17, 2008 - 19:12 ET by RickTaLifeCongrats ABC, for FINALLY taking notice of the elephant in the room (or, the donkey for that matter :-) ).
Peace 8-)
The Most Amazing Thing
April 17, 2008 - 19:46 ET by SupermanThe most amazing thing about this story that everybody seems to be overlooking is Obama's response at the debate when he essentially said that since Ayers terrorist acts were decades ago, then it's okay to have a relationship with him.
Good point, Superman. I
April 17, 2008 - 20:08 ET by QueenMumGood point, Superman. I guess if BinLaden can manage to lay low for another 30 years or so, all will be forgiven and he can get a teaching position at the U. of Chicago.
I am the exotic Queen Mum, and I approved this message.
The media
April 17, 2008 - 21:16 ET by iveseenitallThe media has the responsibility to question Barry about his association with a known terrorist. The guy set bombs on U.S. Government buildings for crying out loud! What?, are we to blow this off as something unimportant, simply because it happened many years ago? Moreover, it implies that Barry is a left winger. Voters must ask themselves if this is what they want as President of the United States. What is truly a surprise, however, is that ABC asked the questions at all.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Mark Levin was playing
April 17, 2008 - 21:19 ET by Free StinkerMark Levin was playing clips of Hillary & Obama.
It was interesting to hear them essestially say: "You're closer to terrorists than I am!"
Pledge to not support RINOs ever again!
I agree it seems to me that
April 18, 2008 - 10:44 ET by mjgI agree it seems to me that some members of the mainstream media are too easy on him. All questions have to come up about past associates, especially someone like Ayers.
Bin Laden
April 17, 2008 - 21:31 ET by m36b1According to Osam- er- I mean Obama, "I guess if BinLaden can manage to lay low for another 30 years or so, all will be forgiven and he can get a teaching position at the U. of Chicago."
QueenMum - that HAS to be the BEST comparison EVER! Now that can do nothing but make me smile - and socialists nash their teeth. Thanks - that made my evening.
Shhh....don't give the left
April 17, 2008 - 22:14 ET by RickTaLifeShhh....don't give the left any ideas. :-P
Ayers / Obama connection
April 17, 2008 - 20:46 ET by chillerI understand Ayers hosted fund raisers for Obama at his home. They're close as thieves. In fact...
That's my understanding,
April 17, 2008 - 21:18 ET by ThisnThatThat's my understanding, too. When someone hosts a fundraiser for you, you can't explain that away with phrases like "his bombings occured when I was 8 years old", or "he's just an English teacher now".
Now everyone is claiming that McCain doesn't get those same tough questions. Ok, that's fair. Let's ask McCain about all those terrorists he associates with; those fundraisers of his who have bombed buildings; his pastor that hates America; his wife who has never felt good about America. I'm sure McCain will be able to field these questions without whining, unlike Obama, who has some serious 'splaining to do.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
You will be known by the
April 17, 2008 - 21:22 ET by NL207You will be known by the company you keep.
My jaw hit the floor when I
April 18, 2008 - 02:32 ET by CooltomMy jaw hit the floor when I heard Hillary say this about Ayers:
'And what they did was set bombs. And in some instances, people died. '
Which is exactly what the Puerto Rican terrorists she had pardoned were convicted of. The FALN creeps she had let go were as equally unrepentant as Ayers -- as were the two Weather Undergrounders that Bill pardoned.
Geesh, I see Obama hasn't cornered the market on Audacity...
excellent!
April 18, 2008 - 10:32 ET by dostrowexcellent!
yes. it is relevant.
April 18, 2008 - 05:14 ET by JWFWe are talking about the Presidency of the United States. There should not be any terrorist connections. none. nada.
The President of the United States is the most powerful man on the planet. He is the leader of the free world.
He is in charge of the Worlds leading economy. 25% of the world's gdp comes from the United States.
He is in charge of the sole superpower. He has the best trained, best equipped, and (little talked about) most experienced Army on the planet.
He is in charge of the world's biggest Navy, bigger than the next 7 smaller navies combined.
He is in charge of a nuclear arsenal that numbers in the thousands of warheads.
He can send a missile up a gnat's ass anywhere on the planet. You name the gnat.
The President will make decisions that affect the lives of millions.
We had one President that took us into this countries' greatest war (Civil War) rather than let her split up.
We had another that decided to ignore the country that attacked us (Japan) and went up against her ally first. (Germany)
We had another that dropped an atomic bomb on a city. When he got no reply, he did it again 3 days later.
In my lifetime, MY lifetime, our Presidents have sent our military in to Vietnam, Grenada, Haiti, Panama, Libya, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, & Bosnia.
Yes, it is relevant, Virginia.
Guilt by association can be quite the slanderous charge...
April 18, 2008 - 08:57 ET by JustaPatriotGuilt by association can be quite the slanderous charge. In politics democrats and republicans share individuals in each party that are radicals in there own right. Before condemning anyone, has anyone seen, read or heard of where Obama has spoken in support of, gave speeches about, or wrote anything advocating these ideas and positions of what these radicals were professing during their “heyday” in the public eye?
Those who fail to learn from History, are destined to repeat it.......
justapatriot
April 18, 2008 - 09:23 ET by AgnosticYou may be correct but the problem Senator Obama has is that there is very little tangible items to make a judgement about him on that you have to wonder about why there seems to be a pattern developing among the few things we do know. I don't take most of this too seriously because it is all about second hand information and associations but it does create a scenario in my mind that is disturbing.
I see Senator Obama talking to the world leaders behind closed doors, as is often the case, and them telling him about all the evils of America and sits there and gives them his knowing nod. I believe this because of his autobiographies and his proven acquaintances with people who consistantly speak out against this country with anger and bitterness. Being the sensitive and intelligent man that he is I also see him reaching out to this people who hate America and asking, "What can we, as the United States, do to make you feel better about us?" I have a problem with this because I believe this to be a great country and that whatever mistakes we have made are far overshadowed by the good. The fact that we are used as an easy scapegoat by dictators around the world to explain while their leadership has failed is not a reason to cater to their wims.
Other than that I will give credit to Senator Obama for having the courage to put himself under scrutiny, his intelligence, hard work and his ability to deliver a speech but unless he wants to lay out what his actions, plans and intentions are then I have to go by what little I am given. And what he gives me is two autobiographies that show me anger and bitterness, a friend/mentor/advisor/preacher that hates the country that allowed him to fleece his flock until he was wealthy and relations with people are unrepitent of attempting to destroy government property and killing American lives.
What cursorily
April 18, 2008 - 14:12 ET by JustaPatriotWhat cursorily information I’ve learned Agnostic, was he started college in 1979, got a degree from Columbia University and Harvard Law School where he was elected president of the Harvard Law Review. Taught part time at the University of Chicago Law School from 1993 through 2004. He has gone through 3 elections from the State legislature. Ran for U.S House of Representatives, lost, and won the Senate seat in 2004. That seems a lot of time to put his foot in his mouth, if he was such the radical that some are trying to make him. I haven’t read his books, so I can’t comment on what’s in them. Lets face it the next president is going to have to go on quite a PR offensive to regain the trust and honor that we have lost since 9/11. You saw only anger and bitterness in his autobiographies? I ‘ll have to bone up on those before I make a voting decision. I didn’t know Wright fleeced his flock to become a millionaire, where might I find that information to read? I have heard and read about Obama repudiating the Wright remarks, and he certainly has spoken out against the violence of the weather underground that went on in the sixties. ( most recently from the debate this week) It’s a good thing your scenario is just in your mind.. it sounds more like a nightmare...:)
Sorry for the delay, but work comes before pleasure…..
Those who fail to learn from History, are destined to repeat it.......
FYI on terroist Ayers
April 19, 2008 - 15:29 ET by JustaPatriothere is an update about that "terrorist" Ayers go to
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/18/politics/washingtonpost/main4026039.shtml?source=RSSattr=Politics_4026039
Those who fail to learn from History, are destined to repeat it.......