Enough with trying to find dirt on Obama...we get it, you don't like him...
Well hello again liar. You christians really don't like Mr. Obama do you?
Did he say something about giants not existing?
Hello Mark. I know at least 2 Democrats that didn't like Obama either. I don't think it's a Christian issue - I think it's a Obama is not qualified issue. But you - as always - know best. I digress.. You probably forgot the Debate.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator, if you get the nomination, you'll have to -- (applause) -- (inaudible).
I want to give Senator Clinton a chance to respond, but first a follow-up on this issue, the general theme of patriotism in your relationships. A gentleman named William Ayers, he was part of the Weather Underground in the 1970s. They bombed the Pentagon, the Capitol and other buildings. He's never apologized for that. And in fact, on 9/11 he was quoted in The New York Times saying, "I don't regret setting bombs; I feel we didn't do enough."
An early organizing meeting for your state senate campaign was held at his house, and your campaign has said you are friendly. Can you explain that relationship for the voters, and explain to Democrats why it won't be a problem?
SEN. OBAMA: George, but this is an example of what I'm talking about.
This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who's a professor of English in Chicago, who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He's not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.
And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values, doesn't make much sense, George.
The fact is, is that I'm also friendly with Tom Coburn, one of the most conservative Republicans in the United States Senate, who during his campaign once said that it might be appropriate to apply the death penalty to those who carried out abortions.
Do I need to apologize for Mr. Coburn's statements? Because I certainly don't agree with those either.
So this kind of game, in which anybody who I know, regardless of how flimsy the relationship is, is somehow -- somehow their ideas could be attributed to me -- I think the American people are smarter than that. They're not going to suggest somehow that that is reflective of my views, because it obviously isn't.
SEN. CLINTON: Well, I think that is a fair general statement, but I also believe that Senator Obama served on a board with Mr. Ayers for a period of time, the Woods Foundation, which was a paid directorship position.
And if I'm not mistaken, that relationship with Mr. Ayers on this board continued after 9/11 and after his reported comments, which were deeply hurtful to people in New York, and I would hope to every American, because they were published on 9/11 and he said that he was just sorry they hadn't done more. And what they did was set bombs and in some instances people died. So it is -- you know, I think it is, again, an issue that people will be asking about. And I have no doubt -- I know Senator Obama's a good man and I respect him greatly but I think that this is an issue that certainly the Republicans will be raising.
And it goes to this larger set of concerns about, you know, how we are going to run against John McCain. You know, I wish the Republicans would apologize for the disaster of the Bush-Cheney years and not run anybody, just say that it's time for the Democrats to go back into the White House. (Laughter, applause.)
Unfortunately, they don't seem to be willing to do that. So we know that they're going to be out there, full force. And you know, I've been in this arena for a long time. I have a lot of baggage, and everybody has rummaged through it for years. (Laughter.) And so therefore, I have, you know, an opportunity to come to this campaign with a very strong conviction and feeling that I will be able to withstand whatever the Republican sends our way.
SENATOR OBAMA: I'm going to have to respond to this just really quickly, but by Senator Clinton's own vetting standards, I don't think she would make it, since President Clinton pardoned or commuted the sentences of two members of the Weather Underground, which I think is a slightly more significant act than me --
AUDIENCE MEMBER: (Applauds.)
MR. GIBSON: Please.
SENATOR OBAMA: -- than me serving on a board with somebody for actions that he did 40 years ago.
Look, there is no doubt that the Republicans will attack either of us. What I've been able to display during the course of this primary is that I can take a punch. I've taken some pretty good ones from Senator Clinton. And I don't begrudge her that. That's part of what the political contest is about.
I am looking forward to having a debate with John McCain, and I think every poll indicates that I am doing just as well, if not better, in pulling together the coalition that will defeat John McCain.
I think you are just attempting to stir things up and are not actually interested in a discussion. But, I digress, I am sure you will bow out after a few sallies when you run out of other's words.
And yes, I do know best, thank you for acknowledging that
Although I do find it interesting how often right-wing politics go hand in hand with your particular type of christianity.
Wonder why that is? Control?
This election year is really something! I know life-long, hard-shell Democrats who are jumping ship to Republican because of Obama and I also know people who are not Christian in the least voting for McCain. Not because they support McCain, but to vote against Obama. So, I don't see this as a Christian issue or a Party issue, but an American issue about who you vote for. My comfort in this trying time is that God is in control and He will see His children through. So, either way, it's taken care of. But, I cannot go against my convictions and vote for anyone who I feel is Anti-American or anyone who I feel will damage our precious country. McCain is not my first choice as president. But I will either vote for McCain or Bob. I have to be able to sleep with my conscious at night.
What exact form of experience is required to become US president, and why, specifically, is that form of experience uniquely necessary?
Are there drawbacks to having experience?
What sort of accomplishments would be considered adequate, or not enough, for 10 years in public service? 20?
(This is specifically directed to those saying Obama doesn't have enough experience to become president)
Did you read the charges Mark - or was your first impulse to attack me as Christian? Let me think for a minute.
You notice Obama said he hardly knew the guy. But in fact he knew him for 4 years. Obama was director of the organization - and Ayers put him there. Then, a normal and natural request to see the records from a PUBLIC library where the fund was housed - is denied - after it is granted. They say it was at the request of the Principal.
Let's see. Tap, tap, tap.
Obama's one and specific Leadership role - and we can't read about what happened. And we're supposed to turn over the world's biggest budget to a novice on - (what do Atheists say - oh yeah - blind faith.)
The University denies access. And who just happens to teach at the University. Oh yeah - the Terrorist Ayers.
Do you read Mark - or are you just a mindless apologist for whatever opposes faith and normalcy?
Does it not matter to you that Obama had a 4year personal relationship with a man who killed 4 people - was caught - got off with a LEGAL technicality - and then goes on to say he didn't think they did enough.
Those aren't right wing words - buckwheat. Those are true facts.
Please - enlighten us with an enlightened mind how we are supposed to dismiss this on what? Humanitarian grounds. Ayers is reformed and Obama was just an innocent. Atheism rules; Obama's innocent. Whatever, whenever, ever, ever.
Tell you what. Talk about issues and maybe we can talk. But if you characterize EVERYTHING as Brilliance against Christianity as your mindset - mind meld us out. Please.
Obama knew a man that killed 4 people. Obama worked with a man who killed 4 people. Obama lied about his relationship about a man who killed 4 people.
Obama doesn't care those people died by the actions of his "friend" (unquote).
Nowhere did Obama use words indicating that he "hardly knew the guy", also nowhere is that exact quote to be found from your above article.
You sir, are a liar.
Just remember, self deception is the best deception so don't be a con about it, believe your own lies too. In the end Mother Nature will reward you . More specifically your own nature will reward you . You will reap what you sow.
Oh, oh, oh, oh - and who is the Principal of the Non Profit who has denied access to public information. Oh yes. Why it's Mr Ayers of course. I guess he just doesn't want those nasty Republicans to misalign poor indefensible Obama mama.
Oh - and what is this??????????????
Help Mark - we need you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please esplain.
""""Weatherman terrorist ideology
The Weathermen were initially part of the Revolutionary Youth Movement (RYM) within the SDS, splitting from the RYM's Maoists by claiming there was no time to build a vanguard party and that revolutionary war against the United States government and the capitalist system should begin immediately. Their founding document called for the establishment of a "white fighting force" to be allied with the "Black Liberation Movement" and other "anti-colonial" movements to achieve "the destruction of US imperialism and the achievement of a classless world: world communism."Wikipedia""""""""""
Did you see that Mark?
"""""to be allied with the "Black Liberation Movement" and other "anti-colonial" movements""""
Or did you just hit the reply button and decide to bash a Christian before READING?
Notice the big fat elephant in the middle of the paragraph. Black Liberation Movement (Theology). Hey - isn't that what Obama's church was about while he wasn't attending it for 20 years??????????????????
Obama's affiliation with Ayers was serving on the same board as him. Decades after he was involved in the Weather Underground. Hardly the deep connection you seem to be having hysterics about.
A far deeper and more insidious connection existed between John McCain and Charles Keating.
Here's what it boils down to. Democratic Liberalism can look the other way when they read this profile about this murderer.
And smile when they nominate for the highest office in the land - a man who spent years with him - WORKING FOR HIM.
Notice Hillary didn't beat Obama up too much in the debate????
Because her husband PARDONED several members of the terrorist organization as his LAST ACT in office. Hillary didn't want Obama to use that against her. That's why in the debate above - Hillary talks about it like it's lace underwear instead of the disgusting thing it is.
Hey - here's a great article from that bastion of Conservatism - Salon magazine. (NOT)
"""After being pardoned by Bill Clinton, former Weatherman member Linda Evans is still an enemy of American democracy."""
http://dir.salon.com/story/news/col/hor … /04/evans/
But I'm sure some Republican got them to write the story. They're sneaky you know.
Of the 5 people involved with Keating - McCain was the only one who was not found to have been involved in a criminal or negligent way. According to the DEMOCRAT prosecuting attorney - he was innocent. The worst that was said and CAN be said - is he used poor judgment. (UNQUOTE)
Do you need a link????
Would it matter???
""""Obama began his CAC board chairmanship in early 1995, and stepped down from the chairmanship in late 1999, though he remained on the board until CAC phased itself out of existence in 2001. At that time, CAC handed over its remaining assets to a permanent new institution, the Chicago Public Education Fund. Obama served on this Fund’s “Leadership Council,” from 2001 through 2004, overlapping with council service by Bill Ayers’s father, Thomas, and Ayers’s brother, John. Bill Ayers, as noted, was a CAC founder, its guiding force, and co-chaired CAC’s powerful “collaborative.” CAC appears to have been housed at UIC because of Ayers’s connection to the school.""""
The whole family is there. But we don't know each other - much.
http://article.nationalreview.com/print … 2Y2OGI0NDM
I just read the respected WaPo Fact Checker article on it:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-che … ction.html
Conclusion: The Obama-Ayers connection is much ado about nothing.
As for McCain-Keating: the fact that he was pardoned simply means he wasn't accused of criminal wrongdoing. "Poor judgment" in such an enormous scandal that had devastating effects on our economy is something I would say is a huge minus against a person trying to be our next president. Remember, he also exercised poor judgment in voting to authorize the Iraq War, too.
I'm in favor of the Iraq war - so to me it was good judgment.
Keating caused the problems not McCain. Big difference.
I know - I know - you could say - Ayers murdered those people - not Obama.
Just doesn't have the same ring does it.
Bad choice of words on your part. He wasn't pardoned. He was exonerated.
So explain to me if Ayers was the FOUNDER and Guiding force - explain to us how Obama just - only - merely - sorta - kinda sat on the same board. Why heck, they probably didn't even wave at each other.
Ick - who would wave at a murderer? They probably just grimaced huh. You know - had to sit there together but hated every minute of it.
yeah, yeah, that's it.
Well we put that to rest.
Obama hated every minute of it.
'You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows,' Cindy McCain's money is alleged to have come from the mafia. Jim Hensley father of Cindy McCain worked for Kemper Marley a bootlegger with possible connections to the mafia. 'Jim Hensley started his Anheuser-Busch distributorship in Phoenix in 1955. Allegedly, Marley bestowed this business upon Hensley as a favor for having kept his mouth shut during the earlier criminal trials.'
Ayers is a murderer now? And Obama is, too, by extension?
I can see why everyone else has dropped out of this discussion...
Truthfully livelonger - I think it's indefensible. Those that agree - are reading and shaking their heads. Those that see the truth of the association but don't like it - can't defend it with any explanation - and don't want to appear to stand up for William Ayers - and dismiss Obama's actions as innocent.
For them - there's safer discussions on the Religion Board; on that - you can beat up any body.
I read the article you posted and that was an old article. It does not take into consideration what we have been talking about here. It is written from the perspective that Obama had an innocent Board association with Ayers. It does not take into effect the fact it was Ayers who was the driving force and founder - and he picked Obama as a member.
It dismisses Ayers as just a misled poor 60's dude - just kinda strung along in the moment of the 60's element - Like Daley says - and it all worked out. Amen. Did you read his bio or no????
It misleadingly showed Ayers was innocent of the bombing but leaves out completely he was one of the leaders of the group that bombed and killed. He was found INNOCENT by a fluke of law. He was guilty as heck. Period. Everything written from the period says so - even HIM.
How can people smoke this stuff over???
The guy was scum and every one around him dismisses his actions as juvenile misgivings of the day. ANYTHING except call him what he is.
Ayers did not leave the group after killings happened. He has never expressed regret in any substantive way. He is proud of what he did and says so regularly.
Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley offers his non-answer on whether the library, named after his father, should release the documents:
"Bill Ayers—I've said this—his father was a great friend of my father," the mayor said. "I'll be very frank. Vietnam divided families, divided people. It was a terrible time of our country. People didn't know one another. Since then, I'll be very frank, [Ayers] has been in the forefront of a lot of education issues and helping us in public schools and things like that."
The mayor expressed his frustrations with outside agitators like Kurtz.
"People keep trying to align himself with Barack Obama," Daley said. "It's really unfortunate. They're friends. So what? People do make mistakes in the past. You move on. This is a new century, a new time. He reflects back and he's been making a strong contribution to our community."
Completely unmentioned is whether documents held at a state-run university's library, about a project to reform and improve public school systems, relating to a public figure who wants to be the next president, can be withheld from the public's eyes.
Also note that Daley says that "people do make mistakes in the past," although William Ayers has never expressed regret for setting bombs in places like the U.S. Capitol and women's bathrooms in the Pentagon.""""""
Uh - it was widely reported that Daley was grimacing when he said this.
Not really - he probably believed every word. Sick.
You really do make it hard for anyone to want to have a discussion with you, especially when you make a point to post more and more like a conspiracy theorist and with great frequency.
Do you have any proof from your own two eyes (and not mass media rumor or "interpretation") that the things you claim to be are true?
How many Vietnamese did the Americans kill in Vietnam? Was it what like 3 million. Oh - and then there was the bombing of Cambodia and the rise of Pol Pot. Can we add another 8 million? speaking of murderers.
Who knows? Let's see. We're talking about Obama's association with Ayers.
If yall want to broaden the discussion - post more topics. This is how most people discuss things. Not discuss them and widen the discussion to disassociated stuff. Please - let us stay on topic.
And I have to agree - I am a conspiracy nut. I know Ayers is a murderer and I'm dumb enough to believe it in spite of all the evidence that says he isn't.
Perhaps context is difficult, in a country where it is against the law, but was not Ayers against the government that killed 3 million Vietnamese and gave rise to Pol Pot.
Ayers was against the war. He had every right to be. His error was in how he decided to be an activist. He chose violence. He justified that violence with the argument that the government used violence - and the war had to be fought at home - with violence against violence.
That's a true fact. Here's how he described it a couple of years ago in a movie by PBS about the Underground.
“Did we do something that was horrendous, awful?… I don’t think so. I think what we did was to respond to a situation that was unconscionable.”
—Bill Ayers, former Weather Underground member
What led the Weathermen to violent action—and given the chance, would they do it again? Former Weather Underground members Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers talked to members of the press about regret, the Sixties and student activism at the Television Critics’ Association Press Tour in January 2004 in Hollywood, California.
In the film, Mark Rudd talks about his qualms and his very divided feelings about what he did. You don’t make any equivalent statement, and I wondered why not… How do you feel about what you did? Would you do it again under similar circumstances?
Bill Ayers: I’ve thought about this a lot. Being almost 60, it’s impossible to not have lots and lots of regrets about lots and lots of things, but the question of did we do something that was horrendous, awful?… I don’t think so. I think what we did was to respond to a situation that was unconscionable.
Two thousand people a day were being murdered in Vietnam in a terrorist war, an official terrorist war… This was what was going on in our names. So we tried to resist it, tried to fight it. Built a huge mass movement, built a huge organization, and still the war went on and escalated. And every day we didn’t stop the war, two thousand people would be killed. I don’t think what we did was extreme…. We didn’t cross lines that were completely unacceptable. I don’t think so. We destroyed property in a fairly restrained level, given what we were up against."""""""
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/weat … rview.html
But that's the problem isn't it? Ayers justified murder with murder (His view)
But the greatest leaders of the era did not. Martin Luther King did not use this kind of violence or justification. Neither did Ghandi. So Ayers assertion - and his defenders - that they only did what they had to do - is unconscionable. They did what they chose to do. They did not merely break the law - they became the law.
So on the one hand - you are suggesting here that Ayers did what he had to do because the powers that be held all the cards.
But on the other hand, the same logic could be used to justify the Abortion Clinic bombers. It could be said they have bombed clinics to stop the 40 million aborted babies because the government has passed an unjust law.
It's the same comparison - but it is unlikely you would support that assertion.
I am not saying I do. I don't. I believe in passive resistance and the moral person will choose that course as well.
Ayers was wrong, so were his comrades and so are his supporters. He is not reformed. He is supported by apologists.
While Ayers was being taped for this interview - Obama was sitting on the same board as Ayers.
""""""We destroyed property in a fairly restrained level, given what we were up against"""""
How did Mr Ayers decide what was and was not "fairly" restrained?
And yet you revere the founding fathers who used violence to detach themselves from England. Martin Luther King and Gandhi were assasinated. When discussion is out of the question violence is the only option. When thieves come and take your home - wonder what you will do.
I do revere them.
Ayers and his compatriots murdered innocents in an action against the government. They destroyed innocent people and their property. I don't know how you can equate the two situations?
Ayers and his ilk were deeply flawed. It's no wonder all of them are in prison, in teaching jobs or in Progressive causes. ALL of them. (except Flanagan - he decided to stay drunk)
Or perhaps I should have said: it's no wonder progressive causes and professorships embrace them. These great moral leaders of the day now reformed and teaching our children how to be smarter Activists.
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/weat … today.html
I'm a little disgusted at someone whose profile makes it seem as though he is a reverent religious man, yet is willing to make assumptions and "cast the stone" based on what he reads in the news.
I agree with livelonger, I can see why this thread has been mostly silent except for the continued postings of this individual, and I'll have no more part in it myself. I ate enough conspiracy pie reading what collegepolitico and thecounterpunch have had to say in these forums, thank you.
Gamergirl - Knowing what you see here about Ayers - would you be appointed by - and sit on - the same board - for 5 years with this man? Would you call him your friend? If yes, would you explain how you justify it? Apart from the discussion above - would you explain?
blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,blah, blah,....but I do admire everyone's research ability to prove points...but the only point proved that makes any difference is that each individual "side" in politics has a completely unique world view if they continue to stay cemented there.
How will the country ever get anything done with constant opposition instead of some eventual finding of middle ground to get things done for the benefit of all involved?
And you have a man in the white house whose killed by the
estimates I read a million islamofascists, to say nothing of Afghanistan or Somalia. Where's the equivalent outrage.
Are you asking me where's my equivalent outrage? If so - let's make another topic. As of yet - I haven't seen any outrage on this thread - this topic - over Mr Ayer's actions and Mr Obama's association with such. Can we justify these actions with assertions from elsewhere?
That's what Ayers and Daley did in the posts above.
Personally I'm not attached to Olbama. Think he is an empire shill same as McCain. But looks like this Ayers thing will be the next big smear campaign launched by the Republicans. What do they call it the smear machine or is it swiftboating. So I want to thank you for informing us beforehand on the substance of the matter. Now will know what they are talkin' about.
I agree with you. All politics is nasty - and this year they have given us two awful choices. But if we have to choose - and we do - we may as well be informed.
May the lessor of two scums win.
Me personally, there's little I like about McCain - but there's nothing I like about Obama.
Just a quick aside.
Barry Obama is seriously going to talk himself out of the chance at the White House. Best thing McCain could do is keep quiet and leave Obama talk his incoherent, mindless blabber until everyone gets tired of him.
PS - proceeding was an opinion from someone who's not an American citizen, does not live in the US and will not participate in your elections. Just an opinion from an outsider.
The word FRIEND is in quotes - Zarm. I believe Barry called him a friend.
So according to you then - I will be reaping quotation marks. I wonder if there's a market?
That's not very clear Clarity.
You can't control what your friends do AFTER you make them your friends.
But you can certainly know what they did BEFORE you choose them.
See the difference?
So what did you do to stop the war, the Viet Nam one or the present 3 ongoing wars, for that matter - oh holier-than-thou-art one.
by Prophecy Teacher 11 years ago
THE OBAMA-AYERS CONNECTIONBy Dick Morris10.8.2008Published in TheHill.com on October 7,2008In the best tradition of Bill Clinton’s famous declaration that the answer to the question of whether or not he was having an affair with Monica depended on “what the definition of ‘is’ is,” Barack Obama was...
by Philip Cooper 5 years ago
Who believes the Republicans will win the White House in two years time?
by Ralph Schwartz 16 months ago
The U.S. economy added 250,000 jobs in October and the unemployment rate held steady at 3.7 percent, according to Labor Department figures released Friday. Once again the numbers are stronger than estimates; Economists had predicted the economy would add 190,000 jobs and the unemployment rate...
by NicoleforObama 11 years ago
Senator Clinton and the Clinton machine keeps going and going and going....If senator Clinton is holding out to become VP, Obama should not leave his drink behind if she is the only person in that room. I am ashamed to be a woman. We are stronger and better than this. I was all for the first woman...
by Reality Bytes 9 years ago
I just want to congratulate the Democrats for running such a well planned and efficient campaign.I would also like to acknowledge the hard work Obama has put into this endeavor.I would also like to acknowledge the incredible efforts of Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama.Good job guys, I wish you all...
by Audrey Selig 5 years ago
Do you think Mitt Romney could beat Hilary Clinton for president in next election? Explain.Romney may try another run at presidency.
Copyright © 2020 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|