b,121Allow me to say something unpopular. Obama's connections to William Ayers is not racist, it's not "swift boating" whatever that means, and it is relevant to the election and the wider politics of our nation. I do not think Obama's associations with this unrepentant terrorist and far left nutjob means that Obama shares his politics. But if McCain had served on two charity boards with an abortion clinic bomber or relied on such whackados to launch his political career, we would not be hearing the end of it. Put another way, liberals are fine with the politics of association when the association is John Hagee or the biblical literalists.
b,121
b,121And another thing. Not another word Democrats. Not another word. When the Iraq war became unpopular, Democrats invented a story about intelligence manipulation and forwarded a smear of mid level political appointees, bringing up their fanciful connections at times to the Likud party in Israel and implying they were foreign agents--with no proof. And then you turn around and squeal about negative campaigning. The liberal side plays a politics of fear as well. Whether it's scaring seniors that Republicans will take away their medicare or whether it's scaring people that Republicans intended to implement a draft, a key smear and lie employed by John Kerry in 2004. It's politics. I suppose we can wish the game was played more honorably, but it never has been played honorably. The first contested election between Adams and Jefferson was as dirty a campaign as you will find.
b,121
b,121All of this said, I don't think Obama is in league with the far left. Chances are he will win and when he does he will destroy, not vindicate, the American left. He has certainly campaigned as a war hawk on foreign policy and his call for more regulation of wall street, I doubt is code for a federal initiative to redistribute wealth. I am uneasy with his connections to ACORN and do not understand why he would attend Reverend Wright's church for as long as he did. But a man who shared Wright's conspiracy world view of our country could not deliver the father's day speech which Obama delivered this year. Ayers is relevant for another reason. I wish this criminal was not able to rehabilitate his career and reputation in Chicago. When he got off on a technicality for his terrorist years, he said, "Guilty as Sin. Free as a bird." An association with this kind of man ought to disqualify you from national office. The fact that it hasn't leads me to think that Daley pere really didn't win the battle of '68, because the street organizers and protesters ended up taking over our universities and neighborhood associations a generation later. I wish the Big Lebowski was right when he said, "your revolution is over. The bums lost." But I guess he was wrong.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121b,121I don't know who hijacked Vitamins account, but bring back the real E**....b,121b,121Whoever this is, you can keep shoveling this shit, but you just end up stinking.b,121b,121Edited to clarify...b,121b,121I have in the past had a lot of respect for you E**, for being almost the only reasonable conservative voice on this board. Unfortunately your posts over the last few weeks are unworthy of the "old" Vitamin. Where you used to bring serious arguments to the table, you now seem to have gone back to the well one time too often, and instead of bringing back facts, you carry only talking points and smears.b,121Ayers is beyond a non-issue, unless - and this I think is the core issue of why McCain is going down the toilet - the right has decided on aiming their last burst of energy at the lunatic fringe of their party.b,121This country is in big, big trouble right now, and instead of offering people solutions (or even suggestions) you come up with weak attemps at rehashing Nixon-era tropes. All of this empty breast beating, flag waving and patriotic dick measuring is rightly seen by most voters as bizarre and inappropriate.b,121Even McCain had to take a step back yesterday, seemingly ashamed of where the Steve Schmidt's of the world have dragged his campaign.b,121I would have thought you were above it.b,121I was wrong.
Oh please. McCain yesterday was correcting a supporter who said Obama was an Arab. At another point he said he thought Obama was an accomplished politician. Just as Obama himself had nothing to say about Sarah Palin, but his campaign feeds a new revelation about her to journalists everyday, McCain himself has little to say about Obama and Ayers while the campaign drums it up. My point here was not to say that Obama was a terrorist like William Ayers. It was rather to criticize a species of self righteousness I have detected among my Democrat voting friends. Call it Sorkinism, for the screenwriter Aaron Sorkin who writes Democrats as forever reluctant to get into the muck of nixonland. My point is that this is an abiding fantasy. Both sides play the politics of association, both sides forward halftruths, lies and misdirections in campaign season. But it seems that only Democrats do not recognize that they too employ this tactic. I am quite sure the old vitamin would have said as much.
What Funky16 said. b,121b,121This idea that serving on a board with someone is a meaningful "association" is intellectually bankrupt. Embarrassingly so. b,121b,121I guess this board doesn't have any smart, articulate people on the right anymore. That's genuinely sad.
b,121Oh please. McCain yesterday was correcting a supporter who said Obama was an Arab. At another point he said he thought Obama was an accomplished politician. Just as Obama himself had nothing to say about Sarah Palin, but his campaign feeds a new revelation about her to journalists everyday, McCain himself has little to say about Obama and Ayers while the campaign drums it up. My point here was not to say that Obama was a terrorist like William Ayers. It was rather to criticize a species of self righteousness I have detected among my Democrat voting friends. Call it Sorkinism, for the screenwriter Aaron Sorkin who writes Democrats as forever reluctant to get into the muck of nixonland. My point is that this is an abiding fantasy. Both sides play the politics of association, both sides forward halftruths, lies and misdirections in campaign season. But it seems that only Democrats do not recognize that they too employ this tactic. I am quite sure the old vitamin would have said as much.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121b,121No. Actually what you're doing is parroting the Republican tactic of poisoning the waters as much as possible, then backing off and acting like you didn't do anything, all the while standing back and pulling that "We don't have a problem with Obama's asociation, it's that he LIES about them." which isn't true either.b,121b,121You're turning into Pontius fu*cking Pilate.
Fine. The two of you are in campaign mode. Nothing I wrote is a Republican talking point. And what's more, ask yourself if a Republican served on a board with an unrepentant abortion clinic bomber, doled out money to said bomber's education initiatives and relied on said bomber to launch his political career, would this be considered "intellectually bankrupt?" Obama is running for president. He is probably going to win that contest. But his past associations and career decisions are relevant to that choice.
I honestly don't see how anyone could be particularly proud about aligning themselves with either party or the extreme lunatics on the far end of both spectrums.b,121b,121I hear Dems trashing McCain for not admonishing his followers who booed the mention of Obama's name, yet there is no shortage of their own kind carrying terribly insulting signs aimed at Palin, McCain and the desired death of Bush/Cheney.b,121b,121Typical two party hypocrisy.b,121b,121E** is certainly right about one thing....Either Barack does not represent the "progressive" left in the least, or he's lied through his teeth in an attempt to attract voters like myself. If he represented the socialist left, he wouldn't have my vote. Only time will tell if he's being truthful in his stated positions.b,121b,121As far as Ayers goes....scumbag deluxe.....spoiled little rich kid who played out his fantasies more than the average guilt ridden white boy. He thought the government was evil and turned to violence to further his political agenda.b,121b,121If you have no problem with that tact, or even worse, support it, just remember this......that means you also support the right of some right wing militia group who may see Obama's presidency as "evil" to do the same thing. b,121b,121You can't sit back and say I support the right of one terrorist group of American citizens because I share their ideals, but not those I disagree with.b,121b,121I don't think Ayers casual and local relationship with Barack should be an issue.b,121It won't keep me from voting for him in November. I also don't think Ayers should be teaching our youth anymore than a self professed, reformed David Duke should.
b,121Fine. The two of you are in campaign mode. Nothing I wrote is a Republican talking point. And what's more, ask yourself if a Republican served on a board with an unrepentant abortion clinic bomber, doled out money to said bomber's education initiatives and relied on said bomber to launch his political career, would this be considered "intellectually bankrupt?" Obama is running for president. He is probably going to win that contest. But his past associations and career decisions are relevant to that choice.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121I have to disagree.....a politician works with literally 1,000's of people and some of them will be scumbags. I'd blame a system that allowed someone like Ayers to be in the position he's in, before I'd blame Barack for working together with him for what he saw as the good of his community.
b,121I honestly don't see how anyone could be particularly proud about aligning themselves with either party or the extreme lunatics on the far end of both spectrums.
b,121
b,121I hear Dems trashing McCain for not admonishing his followers who booed the mention of Obama's name, yet there is no shortage of their own kind carrying terribly insulting signs aimed at Palin, McCain and the desired death of Bush/Cheney.
b,121
b,121Typical two party hypocrisy.
b,121
b,121E** is certainly right about one thing....Either Barack does not represent the "progressive" left in the least, or he's lied through his teeth in an attempt to attract voters like myself. If he represented the socialist left, he wouldn't have my vote. Only time will tell if he's being truthful in his stated positions.
b,121
b,121As far as Ayers goes....scumbag deluxe.....spoiled little rich kid who played out his fantasies more than the average guilt ridden white boy. He thought the government was evil and turned to violence to further his political agenda.
b,121
b,121If you have no problem with that tact, or even worse, support it, just remember this......that means you also support the right of some right wing militia group who may see Obama's presidency as "evil" to do the same thing.
b,121
b,121You can't sit back and say I support the right of one terrorist group of American citizens because I share their ideals, but not those I disagree with.
b,121
b,121I don't think Ayers casual and local relationship with Barack should be an issue.
b,121It won't keep me from voting for him in November. I also don't think Ayers should be teaching our youth anymore than a self professed, reformed David Duke should.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121b,121R***b,121No one here is supporting Ayers. What I'm saying is that these cries about his "association" with Obama are McCarthyism writ large, as well as being supremely irrelavent to this election.b,121E** knows that yet persists in carrying on whipping up cotton candy out of nothing. Ayers was/is a dick. Obama does not support him. His proximity to Ayers on an educational foundation that has NOTHING to do with 60s radicalism is, again, IRRELAVENT.b,121E**, and Pat Buchanan and Lindsey Graham and Sarah fu*cking Palin can stomp around, rolling their eyes and gnashing their teeth, acting like it's 1969 all over again with visions of Angela Davis dancing in their fevered brains, but this is 2008, we're teetering on the brink of a depression and they are not going to be allowed to change the subject.That shit is OVER.
holy crap: I agree with Rock!b,121b,121b,121b,121B/wb,121b,121I'm less concerned with the idea of b,121McCain being on a board with an abortion clinic bomber than:b,1211) him appointing a VP who doesn't think rape or incest victims should have access to an abortion,b,1212) him making thinly veiled promises to appoint Supreme Court justices who would overturn Roe Vs Wade.b,121b,121Eli is correct in saying a lot of usavory claims are made on all sides. Where we disagree is that the mutuality legitimates the act. If you think going after Hagee is bullshit, that doesn't make going after Wright kosher. I also think we'd disagree over which party has proven more adept and shameless about it.
b,121I honestly don't see how anyone could be particularly proud about aligning themselves with either party or the extreme lunatics on the far end of both spectrums.
b,121
b,121I hear Dems trashing McCain for not admonishing his followers who booed the mention of Obama's name, yet there is no shortage of their own kind carrying terribly insulting signs aimed at Palin, McCain and the desired death of Bush/Cheney.
b,121
b,121Typical two party hypocrisy.
b,121
b,121E** is certainly right about one thing....Either Barack does not represent the "progressive" left in the least, or he's lied through his teeth in an attempt to attract voters like myself. If he represented the socialist left, he wouldn't have my vote. Only time will tell if he's being truthful in his stated positions.
b,121
b,121As far as Ayers goes....scumbag deluxe.....spoiled little rich kid who played out his fantasies more than the average guilt ridden white boy. He thought the government was evil and turned to violence to further his political agenda.
b,121
b,121If you have no problem with that tact, or even worse, support it, just remember this......that means you also support the right of some right wing militia group who may see Obama's presidency as "evil" to do the same thing.
b,121
b,121You can't sit back and say I support the right of one terrorist group of American citizens because I share their ideals, but not those I disagree with.
b,121
b,121I don't think Ayers casual and local relationship with Barack should be an issue.
b,121It won't keep me from voting for him in November. I also don't think Ayers should be teaching our youth anymore than a self professed, reformed David Duke should.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1
b,121
b,121
b,121R***
b,121No one here is supporting Ayers. What I'm saying is that these cries about his "association" with Obama are McCarthyism writ large, as well as being supremely irrelavent to this election.
b,121E** knows that yet persists in carrying on whipping up cotton candy out of nothing. Ayers was/is a dick. Obama does not support him. His proximity to Ayers on an educational foundation that has NOTHING to do with 60s radicalism is, again, IRRELAVENT.
b,121E**, and Pat Buchanan and Lindsey Graham and Sarah fu*cking Palin can stomp around, rolling their eyes and gnashing their teeth, acting like it's 1969 all over again with visions of Angela Davis dancing in their fevered brains, but this is 2008, we're teetering on the brink of a depression and they are not going to be allowed to change the subject.That shit is OVER.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121I think we're on the same page.....but you best believe that there are plenty of people out there on the far left who not only support what Ayers did in the 60's, but like Ayers himself, they regret he wasn't more successful.
b,121I honestly don't see how anyone could be particularly proud about aligning themselves with either party or the extreme lunatics on the far end of both spectrums.
b,121
b,121I hear Dems trashing McCain for not admonishing his followers who booed the mention of Obama's name, yet there is no shortage of their own kind carrying terribly insulting signs aimed at Palin, McCain and the desired death of Bush/Cheney.
b,121
b,121Typical two party hypocrisy.
b,121
b,121E** is certainly right about one thing....Either Barack does not represent the "progressive" left in the least, or he's lied through his teeth in an attempt to attract voters like myself. If he represented the socialist left, he wouldn't have my vote. Only time will tell if he's being truthful in his stated positions.
b,121
b,121As far as Ayers goes....scumbag deluxe.....spoiled little rich kid who played out his fantasies more than the average guilt ridden white boy. He thought the government was evil and turned to violence to further his political agenda.
b,121
b,121If you have no problem with that tact, or even worse, support it, just remember this......that means you also support the right of some right wing militia group who may see Obama's presidency as "evil" to do the same thing.
b,121
b,121You can't sit back and say I support the right of one terrorist group of American citizens because I share their ideals, but not those I disagree with.
b,121
b,121I don't think Ayers casual and local relationship with Barack should be an issue.
b,121It won't keep me from voting for him in November. I also don't think Ayers should be teaching our youth anymore than a self professed, reformed David Duke should.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1
b,121
b,121
b,121R***
b,121No one here is supporting Ayers. What I'm saying is that these cries about his "association" with Obama are McCarthyism writ large, as well as being supremely irrelavent to this election.
b,121E** knows that yet persists in carrying on whipping up cotton candy out of nothing. Ayers was/is a dick. Obama does not support him. His proximity to Ayers on an educational foundation that has NOTHING to do with 60s radicalism is, again, IRRELAVENT.
b,121E**, and Pat Buchanan and Lindsey Graham and Sarah fu*cking Palin can stomp around, rolling their eyes and gnashing their teeth, acting like it's 1969 all over again with visions of Angela Davis dancing in their fevered brains, but this is 2008, we're teetering on the brink of a depression and they are not going to be allowed to change the subject.That shit is OVER.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121b,121b,121Corners, b,121b,121McCarthyism is when non-politicians like hollywood screenwriters or activist lawyers cannot get jobs because someone in the government compiled a list of people who should be kept out of non-political industries based on prior associations. Obama is running for president. His past associations are relevant to the choice a voter will make about him. I agree that Ayers should not be the only topic of conversation. Nor should it be the only criterion for choosing a president. But it's fair play. It is not swiftboating, it is not racist and this sort of thing is done by democrats all the time and for the most part Republicans do not bitch and whine. That is the extent of my point. And no I was not saying you supported Ayers or the weather underground. Though I remember a thread four years ago about the hagiography documentary on the WU, where many strutters supported.
b,121I honestly don't see how anyone could be particularly proud about aligning themselves with either party or the extreme lunatics on the far end of both spectrums.
b,121
b,121I hear Dems trashing McCain for not admonishing his followers who booed the mention of Obama's name, yet there is no shortage of their own kind carrying terribly insulting signs aimed at Palin, McCain and the desired death of Bush/Cheney.
b,121
b,121Typical two party hypocrisy.
b,121
b,121E** is certainly right about one thing....Either Barack does not represent the "progressive" left in the least, or he's lied through his teeth in an attempt to attract voters like myself. If he represented the socialist left, he wouldn't have my vote. Only time will tell if he's being truthful in his stated positions.
b,121
b,121As far as Ayers goes....scumbag deluxe.....spoiled little rich kid who played out his fantasies more than the average guilt ridden white boy. He thought the government was evil and turned to violence to further his political agenda.
b,121
b,121If you have no problem with that tact, or even worse, support it, just remember this......that means you also support the right of some right wing militia group who may see Obama's presidency as "evil" to do the same thing.
b,121
b,121You can't sit back and say I support the right of one terrorist group of American citizens because I share their ideals, but not those I disagree with.
b,121
b,121I don't think Ayers casual and local relationship with Barack should be an issue.
b,121It won't keep me from voting for him in November. I also don't think Ayers should be teaching our youth anymore than a self professed, reformed David Duke should.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1
b,121
b,121
b,121R***
b,121No one here is supporting Ayers. What I'm saying is that these cries about his "association" with Obama are McCarthyism writ large, as well as being supremely irrelavent to this election.
b,121E** knows that yet persists in carrying on whipping up cotton candy out of nothing. Ayers was/is a dick. Obama does not support him. His proximity to Ayers on an educational foundation that has NOTHING to do with 60s radicalism is, again, IRRELAVENT.
b,121E**, and Pat Buchanan and Lindsey Graham and Sarah fu*cking Palin can stomp around, rolling their eyes and gnashing their teeth, acting like it's 1969 all over again with visions of Angela Davis dancing in their fevered brains, but this is 2008, we're teetering on the brink of a depression and they are not going to be allowed to change the subject.That shit is OVER.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1
b,121
b,121
b,121
b,121Corners,
b,121
b,121McCarthyism is when non-politicians like hollywood screenwriters or activist lawyers cannot get jobs because someone in the government compiled a list of people who should be kept out of non-political industries based on prior associations. Obama is running for president. His past associations are relevant to the choice a voter will make about him. I agree that Ayers should not be the only topic of conversation. Nor should it be the only criterion for choosing a president. But it's fair play. It is not swiftboating, it is not racist and this sort of thing is done by democrats all the time and for the most part Republicans do not bitch and whine. That is the extent of my point. And no I was not saying you supported Ayers or the weather underground. Though I remember a thread four years ago about the hagiography documentary on the WU, where many strutters supported.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121"this sort of thing is done by democrats all the time and for the most part Republicans do not bitch and whine."b,121b,121Republicans bitch and whine about it CONSTANTLY. They bitch and moan that the media is against them(even though they have their very own network and Talk Radio is completely in their corner), and they bitch and moan TO that media when Dems paint them and their associations a certain way. So now we are hearing about Ayers, which in my opinion is fair game, however people have already heard WHY the McCain camp wants them to hear it, and it's because they are losing on the economy, period. Knowing this, most people are seeing this for what it is, a PLOY, and stay in the camp they were in. If they liked Obama, Ayers makes no difference, if not, one more reason to vote for McCain. Trouble for McCain is that a lot of those independents don't give a shit about stuff like Ayers or the Weathermen.
Agreed. Independents do not care about Obama's past radical associations. They want a president who will fix the economy. And Republicans just accept that the media is against, hence they went out and got their own media.
b,121Agreed. Independents do not care about Obama's past radical associations. They want a president who will fix the economy. And Republicans just accept that the media is against, hence they went out and got their own media.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121My point is not that they feel that the media is against them, it's that because the media may be reporting FACTS the Republicans don't like, they feel the need to create their own instrument by which to promote "facts" of their choosing. To Republicans, not having 100% positive coverage is somehow "unfair" and "biased". It becomes a situation by which those words have no meaning in a discussion anymore, because Republicans have cried wolf about it so loud and so long.
lol @ 'the ayers association is not racism.' did u not see the clips where ppl worried hes 'palin around with terrorists' mention that they heard hes 'an arab'?? You dont have to say 'i hate black ppl' to be a racist just fyib,121b,121b,121the 'he's not like us' is a total racist smear. of course if u use a white radical it gives you plausible deniability but sorry, its only not racist in a vacuum, which the united states most certainly is not
b,121lol @ 'the ayers association is not racism.' did u not see the clips where ppl worried hes 'palin around with terrorists' mention that they heard hes 'an arab'?? You dont have to say 'i hate black ppl' to be a racist just fyi
b,121
b,121
b,121the 'he's not like us' is a total racist smear. of course if u use a white radical it gives you plausible deniability but sorry, its only not racist in a vacuum, which the united states most certainly is not
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121Stupidity and ignorance does not always = racism.b,121b,121Sometimes it's just stupid and ignorant.
b,121ive been reading 'nixonland' - incredible book btw - and it observes how much of nixon and then reagan's success was a result of learning to exploit the 'law and order' (racist) vote in the wake of the riots which undermined the war on poverty - something that politicians on the left and the right had not previously thought to exploit.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1
b,121
b,121I think the increasing priority given over to crime by voters during the 60's and the subsequent appeal to that sentiment from republicans had more to do with this
b,121btw, I know that people like you enjoy reading their own ideas back to themselves, but if you want to expand your knowledge of that era I suggest you look toward a real historian rather than a hack like perlstein.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,1211. i never said that it wasn't an understandable fear - crime did rise, and perlstein recognizes this as well. the point was that politicians like nixon exploited this fear bcuz dems werent doing enough about it - they were just hoping the war on poverty would rachet down the tension, not realizing how bad the situation really was. Its not like your point contradicts mine fyi - but instead of trying to solve the problems republicans just exploited them for electoral gain.b,121b,121the reason for the crime drop btw before you try to correlate it to the rise of reagan or something, is pure demographics - what do you know, when the baby boom gets older, they stop committing so many crimes! what a shock.b,121b,121i think you should probably read it to think a little bit about how the 'riots' were treated by police and national guardsmen who went around shooting innocent people - might open your horizons a bitb,121b,1212. how is perlstein reciting my own ideas back to me? his book has given me a lot more information and a different way of looking at things. also, lol @ you calling him a hack! you know that even ppl on the right have been praising his book for taking the right wing seriously? hes respected and well liked by frum, who he had a great debate with over @ bloggingheads that i recommend, william f. buckley liked his first book, and even george f. will's 'negative' review in the times was pretty grudgingly respectful of its overall analysis, even if it didn't like his use of 'adolescent language (???chicken,??? ???the big one???)' - a big lol coming from george f. will obv.b,121b,121how about you critique perlstein's argument instead of blindly asserting that he's a hack? try to argue in your own words instead of linking to something by a mouthbreather like kathryn jean lopez plz
b,121Allow me to say something unpopular. Obama's connections to William Ayers is not racist, it's not "swift boating" whatever that means, and it is relevant to the election and the wider politics of our nation. I do not think Obama's associations with this unrepentant terrorist and far left nutjob means that Obama shares his politics. But if McCain had served on two charity boards with an abortion clinic bomber or relied on such whackados to launch his political career, we would not be hearing the end of it. Put another way, liberals are fine with the politics of association when the association is John Hagee or the biblical literalists.
b,121
b,121And another thing. Not another word Democrats. Not another word. When the Iraq war became unpopular, Democrats invented a story about intelligence manipulation and forwarded a smear of mid level political appointees, bringing up their fanciful connections at times to the Likud party in Israel and implying they were foreign agents--with no proof. And then you turn around and squeal about negative campaigning. The liberal side plays a politics of fear as well. Whether it's scaring seniors that Republicans will take away their medicare or whether it's scaring people that Republicans intended to implement a draft, a key smear and lie employed by John Kerry in 2004. It's politics. I suppose we can wish the game was played more honorably, but it never has been played honorably. The first contested election between Adams and Jefferson was as dirty a campaign as you will find.
b,121
b,121All of this said, I don't think Obama is in league with the far left. Chances are he will win and when he does he will destroy, not vindicate, the American left. He has certainly campaigned as a war hawk on foreign policy and his call for more regulation of wall street, I doubt is code for a federal initiative to redistribute wealth. I am uneasy with his connections to ACORN and do not understand why he would attend Reverend Wright's church for as long as he did. But a man who shared Wright's conspiracy world view of our country could not deliver the father's day speech which Obama delivered this year. Ayers is relevant for another reason. I wish this criminal was not able to rehabilitate his career and reputation in Chicago. When he got off on a technicality for his terrorist years, he said, "Guilty as Sin. Free as a bird." An association with this kind of man ought to disqualify you from national office. The fact that it hasn't leads me to think that Daley pere really didn't win the battle of '68, because the street organizers and protesters ended up taking over our universities and neighborhood associations a generation later. I wish the Big Lebowski was right when he said, "your revolution is over. The bums lost." But I guess he was wrong.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121the false equivalency argument here is stunningly stupid saying that republicans want to get rid of abortion isnt fearmongering - its on their f*cking party platform. being a domestic terrorist is not a part of the democratic platform. you sound like one of those ridiculous ppl in the press who insists on 'balance' that would have argued that bcuz we hear from FDR we should also give the same amount of time to Hitler. gtfowtbs
b,121oh and also is anyone here really defending the weather underground?
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121I am about to enjoy my Saturday, so I'll respond to this thread later. But I was under the distinct impression that the Weathermen/Weather Underground unit largely dissipated around 1973 - when the Vietnam War ended - leaving several disallusioned and asshurt lefties. That was several years before most of us here were born, and I'm not sure that a young Barack Obama ever had dreams of joining the Red Hand Club. I'll re-join you folks tonight.
b,121Allow me to say something unpopular. Obama's connections to William Ayers is not racist, it's not "swift boating" whatever that means, and it is relevant to the election and the wider politics of our nation. I do not think Obama's associations with this unrepentant terrorist and far left nutjob means that Obama shares his politics. But if McCain had served on two charity boards with an abortion clinic bomber or relied on such whackados to launch his political career, we would not be hearing the end of it. Put another way, liberals are fine with the politics of association when the association is John Hagee or the biblical literalists.
b,121
b,121And another thing. Not another word Democrats. Not another word. When the Iraq war became unpopular, Democrats invented a story about intelligence manipulation and forwarded a smear of mid level political appointees, bringing up their fanciful connections at times to the Likud party in Israel and implying they were foreign agents--with no proof. And then you turn around and squeal about negative campaigning. The liberal side plays a politics of fear as well. Whether it's scaring seniors that Republicans will take away their medicare or whether it's scaring people that Republicans intended to implement a draft, a key smear and lie employed by John Kerry in 2004. It's politics. I suppose we can wish the game was played more honorably, but it never has been played honorably. The first contested election between Adams and Jefferson was as dirty a campaign as you will find.
b,121
b,121All of this said, I don't think Obama is in league with the far left. Chances are he will win and when he does he will destroy, not vindicate, the American left. He has certainly campaigned as a war hawk on foreign policy and his call for more regulation of wall street, I doubt is code for a federal initiative to redistribute wealth. I am uneasy with his connections to ACORN and do not understand why he would attend Reverend Wright's church for as long as he did. But a man who shared Wright's conspiracy world view of our country could not deliver the father's day speech which Obama delivered this year. Ayers is relevant for another reason. I wish this criminal was not able to rehabilitate his career and reputation in Chicago. When he got off on a technicality for his terrorist years, he said, "Guilty as Sin. Free as a bird." An association with this kind of man ought to disqualify you from national office. The fact that it hasn't leads me to think that Daley pere really didn't win the battle of '68, because the street organizers and protesters ended up taking over our universities and neighborhood associations a generation later. I wish the Big Lebowski was right when he said, "your revolution is over. The bums lost." But I guess he was wrong.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1
b,121
b,121the false equivalency argument here is stunningly stupid saying that republicans want to get rid of abortion isnt fearmongering - its on their f*cking party platform. being a domestic terrorist is not a part of the democratic platform. you sound like one of those ridiculous ppl in the press who insists on 'balance' that would have argued that bcuz we hear from FDR we should also give the same amount of time to Hitler. gtfowtbs
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121b,121Read it again genius. I said Democrats fear monger when they tell senior citizens that Republicans want to end medicare or tell voters they will bring back the draft. Another version of this kind of fear mongering is when left wing professors write bullshit stories about how Cheney will order the bombing of Iran any minute. The Democratic party would not have much a message if not for the politics of fear and distortion. As for abortion, the analogy is that a righty wing terrorist who supports say a policy goal of Republicans would be tied to any Republican who meets with them. The same could be said of the weather underground. Both Ayers and democrats wanted to end the war. Only one of them decided to end the war by blowing up government buildings. Anyway, try reading more carefully next time.
you're doing a good job of conflation there. yeah i think fear mongering about the draft is stupid bcuz calling in the draft would have turned public opinion around on the war real f*cking fast. b,121b,121the point that omg both parties traffic in 'fear' is not a surprise. its always been this way. thats not the point. what are you making them fear - islamic boogiemen running for president, or very real issues? Are you really in denial about the nu conservatives plans for iran? They very much do want to invade it, and the only thing preventing it is that public opinion would be so opposed right now.b,121b,121but with your new post about how i should 'read carefully' you've managed to change your argument. is asserting that obama 'pals around with terrorists' pandering to racists? yes. yes it is. so F*ck youb,121b,121essentially what you're doing is muddying legit criticism by arguing that every party tells the ppl out there that the other party will do bad things. that doesnt change the fact that there is a line people shouldnt be crossing, which the republicans are currently doing.b,121b,121you pointing out times in the past where dems have crossed that line doesnt make this time ok for republicans. its a 'whoa robert byrd was in the klan, so democrats cant talk shit about racist republicans!' argument
Well, whoever wins this election better make education a top priority. Peep the 2nd question...b,121b,121b,121object width="425" height="344"1param name="movie" value=""1/param1param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"1/param1embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"1/object1
b,121you're doing a good job of conflation there. yeah i think fear mongering about the draft is stupid bcuz calling in the draft would have turned public opinion around on the war real f*cking fast.
b,121
b,121the point that omg both parties traffic in 'fear' is not a surprise. its always been this way. thats not the point. what are you making them fear - islamic boogiemen running for president, or very real issues? Are you really in denial about the nu conservatives plans for iran? They very much do want to invade it, and the only thing preventing it is that public opinion would be so opposed right now.
b,121
b,121but with your new post about how i should 'read carefully' you've managed to change your argument. is asserting that obama 'pals around with terrorists' pandering to racists? yes. yes it is. so F*ck you
b,121
b,121essentially what you're doing is muddying legit criticism by arguing that every party tells the ppl out there that the other party will do bad things. that doesnt change the fact that there is a line people shouldnt be crossing, which the republicans are currently doing.
b,121
b,121you pointing out times in the past where dems have crossed that line doesnt make this time ok for republicans. its a 'whoa robert byrd was in the klan, so democrats cant talk shit about racist republicans!' argument
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121If anyone is muddying the waters, it is you. To start, the Bush administration does not seek to invade Iran. Hell they haven't even bombed Iran. If you think neoconservatives secretly want to invade Iran then your only sources on the matter are the obscurantist blogs that seem allergic to facts of these matters. And there is nothing legitimate about the kind of fear mongering that Democrats do. For example, Democrats put forth the lie that the Bush administration cooked the books on pre-Iraq war intelligence in an effort to shed responsibility for their own votes. The Democratic fear mongering is to convince their base that a secretive-Likud linked cabal controls the government and is immune to political oversight. Nothing of the sort of course happened this way, but still many in the Democratic party's base believe it. b,121b,121What's more, I don't understand how William Ayers somehow equals baiting people about Obama's middle name? What ever are you talking about. You are in essence accusing McCain of semiotic racism. It's a legitimate avenue of inquiry, Ayers and Wright. These associations are significant because both men are very much out of the mainstream and out of step with what Obama himself says. It's completely fair to ask how Obama, who supports more war in Afghanistan, encourages a Cosby line on black fatherhood, refuses to endorse affirmative action or policies aimed at redistributing wealth, could be at one point aligned with hard left figures like Ayers and Wright. I think, btw, that he has sufficiently answered that question. In the debates on the trail in his speeches, he has articulated a very different agenda than his past associations and as birdman pointed out, the politics of association aren't playing well because of it. But if the tables were turned and a more moderate McCain was once alligned with PW Botha or abortion clinic bombers, it would be a constant topic of conversation. We see this on the left with Palin and her flirtation with the Alaska first party. So it's a retarded double standard.
b,121Democratic fear mongering is to convince their base that a secretive-Likud linked cabal controls the government and is immune to political oversight.
b,121
b,121
h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121Wait, are you suggesting this is not, in fact true? b,121b,121And furthermore, what part of "secretive cabal" do you not understand when asking for "facts" to support the claim?b,121b,121I1They're secretive[/i]. b,121b,121 b,121b,121Seriously, this ping-pong match of "which party is worse" is making me understand Rock's "F*ck 'em both" 'tude so much better. b,121b,121For non-Americans: anyone live in a society with a three or more party system? What happens there? Each party has to come up with twice as many smears?
Comments