View Full Version : Obaba and the Chicago way
www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-kass-mk-bd-12-oct12,0,5393672.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-kass-mk-bd-12-oct12,0,5393672.column)
chicagotribune.com
Daley reins in radicals — the Chicago Way
John Kass
5:26 PM CDT, October 11, 2008
Turn on the TV news when John McCain is picking up undecided voters by invoking Barack Obama (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/obama/)'s relationship with unrepentant American terrorist William Ayers and, invariably, some liberal talking head will sniff in disgust and say Ayers is no big deal where Obama comes from.
Unfortunately, that's true. Ayers is a terrorist. But this is Chicago.
Obama and Ayers are neighbors and they worked together on school issues with the same foundation. Obama's political coming-out party was held in Ayers' living room when Obama was running for his first political office.
And the boss of Chicago is Mayor Richard Daley. Mayor Shortshanks has thrown his protective embrace around both men. These are facts.
But the reason Ayers is not a big deal in Chicago has to do with the Chicago Way, and the left fork of that road that has been bought and paid for by the Daley machine, subsidized by taxpayers who foot the bill for public relations contracts from City Hall.
The new Daley machine is much more sophisticated than his father's. And the stereotype of knuckle-draggers and wiseguys—they're still around, and there are jobs on the city payroll for those who work the precincts.
Yet what's often ignored is that their university-educated cousins get city contracts to spin the news and shape the symbolism and tell out-of-town reporters that Ayers is no big deal. They won't bite the hand that feeds them. For an examination of the Daley spin machine—and its cost to taxpayers—please see Tribune reporter Dan Mihalopoulos' story in the Sunday editions.
One friend of Obama and Ayers is former '60s radical Marilyn Katz, now an Obama fundraiser, strategist and public relations maven. She's often a go-to quote for reporters to knock down the Ayers-Obama story.
"What Bill Ayers and [former Black Panther, now U.S. Rep.] Bobby Rush . . . did 40 years ago has nothing to do with [the presidential campaign]," Katz was quoted as saying in the Chicago Sun-Times in April. "[Ayers] has a national reputation. He lectures at Harvard [University] and Vassar [College]."
What that story and many other pro-Obama articles gloss over is that during the violent protests of the 1968 Democratic National Convention here, Katz was the security chief for the radical Students for a Democratic Society. She once advocated throwing studded nails in front of police cars, back in the SDS days when the group was alleged to have thrown cellophane bags full of human excrement at cops and cans of urine and golf balls impaled with nails.
How things change.
Under this Daley, her firm, MK Communications, has many city deals, and one involves public relations for the Chicago Police Department's community policing program. From nails to contracts, the Chicago Way. Apparently, irony was not a '60s thing.
Now, as Daley prepares to lay off more than 1,000 city workers, he's given Katz and other public relations firms five-year contracts that could pay them as much as $5 million each for consulting, advertising and promotion.
Getting in good with Daley hasn't been bad for business. She also lists as her clients Daley's Chicago Housing Authority, Daley's City Colleges, Daley's city Law Department, and Daley's Departments of Aviation, Environment, Housing, Human Services, Planning and Development, Public Health, Public Works, Streets and Sanitation, Intergovernmental Affairs, Special Events—the list goes on.
Clearly, if she wasn't a good soldier for Shortshanks her list of clients would be quite small. Katz is often aggravating, but she's also funny and smart, so I called her to submit my theory: That by buying off the political left—through PR contracts to Katz, through his own support for Ayers—Daley maintains control over message and symbolism.
"I don't see it that way," said Katz. "As kids, our issues were schools, the environment, housing—and these things are the same things that the mayor cares about. So we have this in common. The agendas that drove us pulled us together. It's about respect for each other's point of view, not what we did when we were 19."
On Ayers and Obama, Katz still insists it isn't a story.
"Bill and I were in different parts of SDS. We disagreed on tactics. Bill has spent his entire life contributing to the betterment of society. That's all I can say about Bill," she said.
Happily, I beg to differ. Ayers is a terrorist—the narcissistic son of privilege and clout—whose father, Thomas, was the boss of Commonwealth Edison and a friend of the late Mayor Richard J. Daley. As a leader of the ultraviolent Weather Underground, Ayers admitted to helping bomb the U.S. Capitol and the Pentagon in the 1970s. He should have been sent to prison. Instead, Chicago political clout allowed him and his wife, fellow radical Bernardine Dohrn, to magically join the payrolls of universities here.
Obama says he was 8 years old when the bombs went off. But he was a grown man when he sought Ayers' political blessing, and when they worked on the same education projects.
"They're friends. So what?" Mayor Daley said in August.
He's the boss and the master spinner. So it must not be a story.
__________________________________________________ ___
It seems this Ayers link will not go away.
Keller
10-12-2008, 09:06 PM
I'm fed up with the bullshit.
The GOP VP fires an innocent man in an abuse of her power and no one gives a fuck. Mabus only bothers to post because I called on him to post 4 times. And then he confirms he is just another GOP apologist.
But Ayers deserves more comment? Can we beat a dead horse any longer? I don't even know why I try.
Parkbandit
10-12-2008, 09:07 PM
It seems this Ayers link will not go away.
How exactly is it supposed to just "go away"? It's not like Obama can go back in time and make more appropriate decisions about who he actively teams up with.
Keller
10-12-2008, 09:10 PM
How exactly is it supposed to just "go away"? It's not like Obama can go back in time and make more appropriate decisions about who he actively teams up with.
So begins the GOP male cheerleader circle-jerk.
Enjoy each other, fellas!
So I take it the GOP consensus is that Chicago harbors a domestic terrorist. Not to mention you could probably find more WMD's here than in Iraq. I feel a preemptive strike coming in the not so distant future. OH NOEzzz's.
I'm going to bunker down now.
ElanthianSiren
10-12-2008, 09:36 PM
Not to mention you could probably find more WMD's here than in Iraq.
:lol: Win.
I had another paragraph, but I've come to the conclusion that I don't care, and this is politics as usual.
Daniel
10-12-2008, 10:38 PM
rofl. Keep trying Gan. We all totally buy you're a moderate and not some GOP hack.
Btw. Obama: 9 point lead.
We've already had this discussion. I'm not a GOP hack because I've voted for Democrats in the past, and probably will this upcoming election cycle.
In voting standards, I'm a moderate.
By your standards, because I'm voting against Obama and for McCain I'm a GOP hack.
At least be honest with yourself.
PS. I'll cling to my guns if you'll continue to cling to your polls.
Methais
10-12-2008, 10:47 PM
Obaba and the Chicago way
http://capslockhouse.pbwiki.com/f/fail.PNG
Mabus
10-12-2008, 10:50 PM
Btw. Obama: 9 point lead.
That with or without the Bradley affect?
Who is Barack Obama? Is he the thoughtful, moderate guy he's appeared to be in the first two presidential debates? Or is he a closet radical? The election is less than a month away, and we still don't know.
In his campaign advertising, John McCain has made much of the association between Sen. Obama and William Ayers, a leader of the Weathermen domestic terror group in the 1970s who has never expressed regret for setting bombs in the Capitol, the Pentagon and police stations. But Sen. McCain didn't mention Mr. Ayers in Tuesday's debate.
"Why doesn't he say these things to my face?" Sen. Obama wondered in an interview with ABC after that debate. It's a fair question. And a puzzling one, because the relationship between Sen. Obama and Mr. Ayers is much closer than Sen. Obama has so far acknowledged. Sen. Obama's first campaign for the Illinois Senate began in Mr. Ayers' living room, and in 1995 Mr. Ayers was instrumental in the selection of Mr. Obama, then a junior attorney at a second-tier law firm, as chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an education "reform" project that spent $110 million to no apparent effect, other than providing employment to otherwise unemployable radicals.
The relationship may have begun sooner and been closer. Mr. Ayers was in graduate school at Columbia University when Barack Obama was an undergraduate there in the early 1980s. Did they meet then? A few years later, Michelle Obama and Mr. Ayers' wife, Bernadine Dohrn, also a former terrorist, worked at the same time for the Chicago law firm Sidley Austin.
Investigative reporter Jack Cashill has noted some intriguing coincidences between Sen. Obama's 1995 autobiography, "Dreams From My Father," and Mr. Ayers' 2001 book, "Fugitive Days," for which Sen. Obama wrote a dust-jacket blurb. Both books have the same lyrical style and are filled with nautical imagery, which would come naturally to Mr. Ayers, who spent a year as a merchant seaman, but which appear nowhere else in Mr. Obama's writing.
Excerpts from "Fugitive Days" and from "Dreams From My Father" both scored 54 on reading ease and a 12th-grade reading level on the Flesch Reading Ease Score, Mr. Cashill found. Scores can range from 0 to 121. Excerpts from "Fugitive Days" averaged 23.13 words a sentence. "Dreams" averaged 23.36 words a sentence. Excerpts from Sen. Obama's second book, "The Audacity of Hope," average 29 words per sentence, and a ninth-grade reading level, Mr. Cashill said.
In "Dreams From My Father," Mr. Obama writes fondly of "Frank," a mentor while he was growing up in Hawaii. "Frank" was Frank Marshall Davis, a member of the Communist Party USA, and who was on the FBI's list of subversives.
Both Sen. Obama and Mr. Ayers spoke at a testimonial dinner for Rashid Khalidi, a former member of the Palestine Liberation Organization and a founder of the rabidly anti-Israel Arab American Action Network, when Mr. Khalidi left the University of Chicago for Columbia University. Sen. Obama lectured part time at the University of Chicago law school from 1993 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004.
"Khalidi and Obama lived in nearby faculty residential zones and the two families dined together a number of times," a source on the University of Chicago faculty told Worldnet Daily. "The Obamas even babysat the Khalidi children."
In his 1996 campaign for the Illinois Senate, Barack Obama sought and received the endorsement of the New Party, a creation of the Democratic Socialists of America that was so far to the left even the Green Party described it as fringe. Then there is Sen. Obama's relationship to ACORN (Alliance of Community Organizations for Reform Now), a radical group under investigation for fraudulent voter registrations in a dozen states. Mr. Obama worked with ACORN as a community organizer, and served for a time as its lawyer in Chicago.
Finally, there is the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who Sen. Obama described as a father figure, and to whose racist, anti-American sermons he listened to for 20 years.
For me, a lifetime of fishy associations matters more than soothing words. But if Sen. McCain is unwilling to confront Sen. Obama about his radical associations, then the issue will have no traction, because you can be sure few journalists will report on them independently. He has one more chance, on Wednesday.
First published on October 12, 2008 at 12:00 am
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08286/919158-373.stm
BigWorm
10-12-2008, 11:30 PM
Oh shit they found out that Obama is a secret muslim terrist.
Mighty Nikkisaurus
10-12-2008, 11:50 PM
Oh shit they found out that Obama is a secret muslim terrist.
I'm surprised they didn't find out earlier! Look at his middle name!
Sean of the Thread
10-12-2008, 11:59 PM
Rofl my old lady saw an Obama/Biden bumper sticker the other day and said "I thought Obama Bin Biden was a terrorist.. why do people have have a bumper sticker for him?"
I didn't know what to say.
Tea & Strumpets
10-13-2008, 07:27 AM
I'm fed up with the bullshit.
Not everyone has your ability to separate their personal feelings and consistently give an unbiased viewpoint. :D It always cracks me up when you guys (regular posters in the politics folders) start calling each other partisan.
Keller
10-13-2008, 08:35 AM
Not everyone has your ability to separate their personal feelings and consistently give an unbiased viewpoint. :D It always cracks me up when you guys (regular posters in the politics folders) start calling each other partisan.
At least we bother to discuss their topics. This is a discussion board, afterall.
They just post the same fucking stories over and over.
Why not just bot your account at this point, Gan?
RainyDay2080
10-13-2008, 08:57 AM
For me, a lifetime of fishy associations matters more than soothing words. But if Sen. McCain is unwilling to confront Sen. Obama about his radical associations, then the issue will have no traction, because you can be sure few journalists will report on them independently. He has one more chance, on Wednesday.
First published on October 12, 2008 at 12:00 am
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08286/919158-373.stm
If you investigate anyone who has spent any amount of time in academia or politics you're going to find they're friends with all sorts of different people. If you investigate anyone who's spent any amount of time in diverse social organizations you're going to find they're friends with all sorts of different people.
I had friends who supported communist ideals when we were in college. I knew people in a group I belonged to who bought and sold drugs. I'm not a communist and I'm not a drug dealer.
Ayers should have paid for his crimes, but that's history. What matters is if Obama is or was involved in radical or illegal activities. Nothing has been presented to indicate he is or was. Just that he knows people who were. McCain does too.
RD
Parkbandit
10-13-2008, 09:07 AM
If you investigate anyone who has spent any amount of time in academia or politics you're going to find they're friends with all sorts of different people. If you investigate anyone who's spent any amount of time in diverse social organizations you're going to find they're friends with all sorts of different people.
I had friends who supported communist ideals when we were in college. I knew people in a group I belonged to who bought and sold drugs. I'm not a communist and I'm not a drug dealer.
Ayers should have paid for his crimes, but that's history. What matters is if Obama is or was involved in radical or illegal activities. Nothing has been presented to indicate he is or was. Just that he knows people who were. McCain does too.
RD
Couple questions:
1) Did you actively seek this Communist friend out for political purposes?
2) Did you announce your political aspirations from this individual's house?
3) Did you sit on a number of boards with this individual.. directing money and funds to organizations that the two of you agreed upon?
4) Did you run for political office and then distance yourself from this Communist "friend"?
You may disagree and believe that this really isn't that big of a deal... but you can't simply dismiss this as all random events and a pure coincidence that Obama and Ayers worked together on a number of things. This was a political collusion between the two.
Daniel
10-13-2008, 09:11 AM
We've already had this discussion. I'm not a GOP hack because I've voted for Democrats in the past, and probably will this upcoming election cycle.
In voting standards, I'm a moderate.
By your standards, because I'm voting against Obama and for McCain I'm a GOP hack.
At least be honest with yourself.
PS. I'll cling to my guns if you'll continue to cling to your polls.
Be honest with myself? LOL. That hilarious. You're a GOP hack because you always seem to pull stories like this out of your ass or take some 'principled' position about democratic candidates and yet not once do you ever do the same thing for your conservative crushes.
When Biden and Obama disagree in public not only is it worth posting it's oh noeeeesss!!!1! The campaign is falling apart!! I could never vote on a ticket where people disagree and I can't believe biden was so insubordinate! Whereas when palin openly questions Mccain it's a non story and some trite excuse on how you 'can't post everything'.
It's sad Gan. Seriously. No one buys your bullshit. At least pb and crb have the balls to admit their biases.
Parkbandit
10-13-2008, 09:13 AM
It's sad Gan. Seriously. No one buys your bullshit. At least pb and crb have the balls to admit their biases.
It kind of reminds me of some retard who tried to claim he wasn't a partisan liberal hack because he once voted for George W Bush.
Oh wait.. that was you... you nutless wonder boy.
Daniel
10-13-2008, 09:15 AM
:thumbsup:
I'm fed up with the bullshit.
The GOP VP fires an innocent man in an abuse of her power and no one gives a fuck. Mabus only bothers to post because I called on him to post 4 times. And then he confirms he is just another GOP apologist.
But Ayers deserves more comment? Can we beat a dead horse any longer? I don't even know why I try.
I'm sure politics had no effect on that investigation. Right? Palin is liked by the people of Alaska but not the government. The entrenched republicans dislike her because she attacked them to win her seat. The democrats don't like her because she is running against the messiah. How ironic to see a liberal get all bent out of shape over, if it is true (and quite frankly when the Dem in charge says he wants to time the release for most election fallout I question the validity of any finding), what amounts to a minor case of cronyism, while at the same time conveniently ignoring the travesty of cronyism that is fannie may and freddie mac which are both far more relevant to national politics and our economy and to the lives of everyday Americans.
http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/mfl/lowres/mfln130l.jpg
Mabus
10-13-2008, 10:34 AM
And it's time for Crb's "b-b-b-b-but the Democrats..!"
That mean you are saving your "B-b-b-b-b-but the republicans!" for the voting threads?
Perhaps you don't know much about Sarah Palin, but you know that she pissed off many Republicans in her rise to power, she took on the old Republican establishment and took away a lot of their pet projects.
The fact that Republicans voted to authorize the investigation doesn't mean it was done without bias.
Furthermore, in the end, the report found nothing.
Can you imagine a world in any circumstance where the report would have been released with nothing but glowing praise for Palin in the current election climate? Seriously? Can you? Are you so obtuse as to think that that was ever possible? Do you delude yourself to such a large degree.
The report was always going to say bad things about her, always. What was at issue was if they would find anything actionable, and no, they did not. She will not be punished in anyway because they had no proof to bring any charges that warranted punishment.
The fact that you have people who do not like Palin saying bad things about her should not be considered news or surprising in the least.
I also have to laugh at your characterization of "neo-con" "never own up" attitude. Apparently Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and all the rest are "Neo cons" now?
Perhaps the meaning of the pot/kettle cartoon was lost on you.
I did not pick it randomly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pot_calling_the_kettle_black
That may help.
The liberal (and MSM) hypocrisy at this point in today's society is palpable. Consider some examples.
Being alarmed that McCain supporters are supposedly turning into dangerous radicals - lets ignore all the violent left wing protesters who have done far worse that merely shout "Obama is a terrorist" at a rally. Destruction and defacing of property, assaults, interfering with businesses and roads etc.
Being offended over McCain ads linking Obama to Ayers, but being okay with Obama ads linking McCain to Bush, and being okay with character assassinations of Palin and McCain in some very horrendous ways.
Accusing McCain of going negative and lying, when Obama has run more negative ads (it is true, he has run more), and lies in practically every one when he says McCain wants to give special tax cuts to companies who ship jobs overseas, oil companies, etc.
The Reid-Obama Gambit of first asking McCain to come to washington, then attacking him when he does.
The main difference between conservatives and liberals at this point is the conservatives are not walking around with a "my shit don't stink" attitude.
Both sides are running negative ads, both sides lie & mischaracterize things, both sides do character attacks. But only the democrats are pretending that they're not.
Hence - pot kettle cartoon. Get it?
Keller
10-13-2008, 11:00 AM
She also fired an innocent man because he wouldn't do her bidding on a personal matter.
We also know that about Sarah Palin.
Mabus
10-13-2008, 11:14 AM
She also fired an innocent man because he wouldn't do her bidding on a personal matter.
We also know that about Sarah Palin.
Innocent, guilty, what the hell does it matter? Maybe she did not like his shoes.
Perfectly legal within her capacity as Governor.
At least we bother to discuss their topics. This is a discussion board, afterall.
They just post the same fucking stories over and over.
Why not just bot your account at this point, Gan?
Because we discuss things here. If you dont like the topic, or if it makes you uncomfortable - then you dont have to participate. In fact, you dont even have to click on the thread. Its that simple. No need to cry over it. Just dont click on it.
If you investigate anyone who has spent any amount of time in academia or politics you're going to find they're friends with all sorts of different people. If you investigate anyone who's spent any amount of time in diverse social organizations you're going to find they're friends with all sorts of different people.
I had friends who supported communist ideals when we were in college. I knew people in a group I belonged to who bought and sold drugs. I'm not a communist and I'm not a drug dealer.
Ayers should have paid for his crimes, but that's history. What matters is if Obama is or was involved in radical or illegal activities. Nothing has been presented to indicate he is or was. Just that he knows people who were. McCain does too.
RD
I did not realize that the discussion of Obama and Ayers was closed. I happen to think its a valid topic of discussion. As much validity in fact as Palin's ethics abuse. All topics such as these go to character and thus deserve to be on the table. What makes these topics even more suspicious is when there's huge attempts to suppress the dialigue.
Be honest with myself? LOL. That hilarious. You're a GOP hack because you always seem to pull stories like this out of your ass or take some 'principled' position about democratic candidates and yet not once do you ever do the same thing for your conservative crushes.
When Biden and Obama disagree in public not only is it worth posting it's oh noeeeesss!!!1! The campaign is falling apart!! I could never vote on a ticket where people disagree and I can't believe biden was so insubordinate! Whereas when palin openly questions Mccain it's a non story and some trite excuse on how you 'can't post everything'.
It's sad Gan. Seriously. No one buys your bullshit. At least pb and crb have the balls to admit their biases.
Again, I'm not selling anything. I'm clearly voting for McCain/Palin. My record speaks for itself.
It kind of reminds me of some retard who tried to claim he wasn't a partisan liberal hack because he once voted for George W Bush.
Oh wait.. that was you... you nutless wonder boy.
Winner winner, chicken dinner.
That mean you are saving your "B-b-b-b-b-but the republicans!" for the voting threads?
:lol:
Keller
10-13-2008, 11:23 AM
facepalm
Perfectly legal within her capacity as Governor.Correct.
Obama serving on legitimate boards with present day Ayers and living in the same neighborhood as this former 60s radical "domestic terrorist" turned college professor was perfectly legal and within his capacity as a community organizer and up and coming politician concerned with social issues.
Obama has already called Ayers' actions in the 60s despicable. Should he be held accountable for Ayers current work in education or past radicalism? No, why should he? Ayers past is a reflection on Ayer's and no one else, certainly not Barak Obama or any who associates with him today, save maybe his wife.
CrystalTears
10-13-2008, 11:34 AM
I can't believe this is still an issue for some people.
Keller
10-13-2008, 11:35 AM
I can't believe this is still an issue for some people.
We're just discussing things here, CT. Like it or leave it!
CrystalTears
10-13-2008, 11:36 AM
Heh, I was just wondering why it needs to be discussed in the first place. Oh well.
Can we find out if Obama is associated with anyone who has the Nobel Peace prize? Maybe he'll get credit for that and call it even.
Keller
10-13-2008, 11:38 AM
Heh, I was just wondering why it needs to be discussed in the first place. Oh well.
I think the most important thing to me is that Ayers selected Obama.
Why did this radical choose Obama? That's what is hard for me to stomach.
People rarely respond to your posts (both you and Mabus) for good reason. There's no point; you're not interested in reality. I have no idea why I am right now other than boredom.
I know Palin pissed off the Republicans; she has a knack for pissing people off, donnchaknow? Trying to paint her as a fiscal conservative as she sought huge sums of federal cash is funny, though. She was called out for doing this and has largely--and properly--shut up about it.
So you're saying no investigation coming out of the bipartisan investigation and authorized by her own party can be trusted? So what magical, unbiased authority is there to keep her cronyism and nepotism in check?
They found unethical behavior, but no crimes committed. Honestly, her repeated assertions that the probe "cleared her of any wrongdoing" are going to have a negative impact.. People can read for themselves and her credibility flies right out the window when they see the report claims:
.
Again, your conspiracy theories about people trying to abuse their power to discredit Palin are founded in what, exactly? The resentful , scorned Republicans of Alaska trying to get McCain/Palin to lose so Palin stays governor of Alaska? Makes no sense whatsoever.
This is not a case of "people who do not like Palin saying bad things about her." This was a bipartisan investigation of the abuse of her office. It's hard enough to get the two sides to agree on anything, much less agree to make things up.
Yet more meaningless "B-b-b-b-b-but the Democrats..!" deflection. Has George W. Bush ever admitted a mistake? Ever? Has any Republican president since the first neocon, Reagan?
You're right. Let's excuse the hatred, paranoia and bullshit that Palin has been stirring up in almost every speech she's given people of her own party. They're the same politics of fear and manipulation that the right typically resort to, whether it's "THE GAYS WILL GET YOUR CHILDREN" or "A VOTE FOR THE DEMOCRATS IS A VOTE FOR THE TERRORISTS" like in the previous elections or the campaigns of misinformation labeling Obama either a Muslim, a terrorist, a Muslim terrorist, or unpatriotic.
McCain, unlike you, has actually realized that he's sacrificed the dignity he had and is trying (in vain, now that the base's reactionary fire is lit, angry and raring to go) to calm things down.
Palin has been criticized for being incompetent and grossly underqualified. You say Palin has had her "character assassinated." In SNL's skit mocking one of her interviews with Couric, they didn't even have to make anything up. They used her exact words (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/29/snls-palin-mockery-used-t_n_130363.html) and they came off as the comedy they were.
The idea that you're accusing one side of character assassination and not seeing the blatant campaign of misinformation perpetuated by the right is just ludicrous and once again shows how little perspective you have. Those very same people that McCain was trying to calm down were saying "he's a terrorist," or "He's an Arab" and trying to contradict McCain. These people have been lied to--by their own side--in order to anger them up for the vote.
"It is true! Why? Because I want it to be!"
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/12/fact-check-are-all-mccains-ads-negative/
Even fact checking of claims on both sides comes up with 73% of McCain's being negative, 61% of Obama's. Please shut up. You can find statistics on both sides claiming one thing, but when fact checking organizations either come up with "McCain's doing it more" or "they're spending the same on it," you don't have a leg to stand on.
Reid, at some point, said that leadership from McCain and Obama would be needed, but didn't say "suspend your campaign to do so in overly dramatic, sweeping fashion"; the leadership in the Congress said it wasn't necessary, and his dissappearing poll numbers seem to show Americans thought it was a stupid move. Additionally, McCain mentioned several times that he wouldn't have gone negative if Obama had agreed to his supposed advantage in town hall debates, and then by most measures, lost the one we just had.
McCain's schizophrenic campaign is in disarray, and has been ever since he betrayed his message by picking Palin--who represents everything wrong about the GOP since Reagan destroyed and rebuilt the conservatives. Obama is far from perfect, but the McCain/Palin ticket winning would be a disaster for everyone.
The Democrats are pretty shitty--the Republicans are just abysmal. Both sides regularly disappoint me, but it seems that even if huge scandals come out once Bush is ran out of office, you wouldn't be phased. Even if you found out they'd completely, maliciously fabricated pre-war intelligence, vastly abused their surveillance powers and given huge deference to energy special interest groups, I doubt either you or Mabus would give it a second thought.
You fail at life.
You attack the people you are against for doing the same things that the people you are for do, or do more often, or to a worse degree.
Then, for some reason, you think political posturing had no bearing on an investigation (lead by Democrats by the way, I know Republicans originally voted to authorize it) into the VP candidate in an election year.
Then you firmly state that the report is damning evidence, despite having no evidence of any actionable wrong doing of any kind.
How can one be so obtuse to be shocked that a partisan investigation into a VP candidate in an election year resulted in a negative statement about said candidate? And yes, calling it bipartisan is like calling congress bipartisan. Republicans vote, but democrats have control. And calling it bipartisan because it started that way does not mean it ended that way.
Suppose the Republicans were in power right now, and suppose they ran an investigation into Obama's links with ACORN and campaign funding. Suppose their final report said "Obama done bad, we think it was unethical, don't vote for that bad dude, but oh ya, he didn't do anything technically wrong or illegal." Would you be surprised?
I'll ask you again, can you fathom any universe where the announcement would be anything other than negative?
What matters is not what the panel said, they can say anything they want, there is no legal burden of proof for calling someone unethical. Especially in an election year you have to view their statements through the lense of partisan politics and politial theatre which could everything that is going on right now. What matters is what they do, and they're doing nothing, because there is nothing to be done, because nothing wrong was done.
Newsflash, politicalparty1 led investigation into VP candidate of politicalparty2 released 1 month prior to election has bad things to say.
Shocking! Politicians posturing for political gain of their party. OMG. I did not see such a thing coming.....
Kefka
10-13-2008, 12:28 PM
That with or without the Bradley affect?
Polls may underestimate Obama's support by 3 to 4 percent, researchers say
The Bradley effect is named for former Los Angeles mayor Tom Bradley, a black, who lost a close 1982 gubernatorial election in California after holding a solid lead in the polls. As the 2008 primaries played out, Greenwald and Albertson found that the Bradley effect only showed up in three states -- California, New Hampshire and Rhode Island.
However, they found a reverse Bradley effect in 12 primary states. In these states they found actual support for Obama exceeded pre-election polls by totals of 7 percent or more, well beyond the polls' margins of error. These errors ranged up to 18 percent in Georgia.
"The Bradley effect has mutated. We are seeing it in several states, but the reverse effect is much stronger," said Greenwald. "We didn't have a chance to look at these effects before on a national level. The prolonged Democratic primary process this year gave us a chance to look for this effect in 32 primaries in which the same two candidates faced each other."
Albertson and Greenwald believe the errors in the polls are being driven by social pressures that can operate when voters are contacted by telephone prior to an election. They said that polls from states in the Southeast predicted a large black vote for Obama and a much weaker white vote. They found that, in a few Southeast states, exit polls showed that both whites and blacks gave more votes to Obama than the pre-election polls had predicted.
"Blacks understated their support for Obama and, even more surprising, whites did too. There also is some indication that this happened in such Republican states as Montana, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Missouri and Indiana," Greenwald said.
"If you call people on the phone today and ask who they will vote for, some will give responses influenced by what may be understood, locally, as the more desirable response. It is easy to suppose that these people are lying to pollsters. I don't believe that. What I think is they may be undecided and experiencing social pressure which could increase their likelihood of naming the white candidate if their region or state has a history of white dominance. They also might give the name of the Republican if the state is strongly Republican.
http://www.physorg.com/news142862643.html
Keller
10-13-2008, 12:28 PM
But we're supposed to take the allegations of the Obama/Ayers association as indicative of his character?
Newsflash, politicalparty1 continues to bleat allegations with respect to candidate of politicalparty2 and wants the country to believe candidate is someone indicted of wrongdoing.
Shocking! Politicians posturing for political gain of their party. OMG. I did not see such a thing coming . . .
Keller
10-13-2008, 01:44 PM
Couple questions:
1) Did you actively seek this Communist friend out for political purposes?
2) Did you announce your political aspirations from this individual's house?
3) Did you sit on a number of boards with this individual.. directing money and funds to organizations that the two of you agreed upon?
4) Did you run for political office and then distance yourself from this Communist "friend"?
You may disagree and believe that this really isn't that big of a deal... but you can't simply dismiss this as all random events and a pure coincidence that Obama and Ayers worked together on a number of things. This was a political collusion between the two.
But Obama said they are just friends from the neighborhood.
This reminds me of that time that you took Ilvane to task because she claimed she wasn't not voting for Obama because she was an irrational Hillary supporter. You didn't blindly follow her explanation and instead decided to look at the underlying facts.
I did get that story right, didn't I?
Clove
10-13-2008, 01:56 PM
Couple questions:
1) Did you actively seek this Communist friend out for political purposes?
2) Did you announce your political aspirations from this individual's house?
3) Did you sit on a number of boards with this individual.. directing money and funds to organizations that the two of you agreed upon?
4) Did you run for political office and then distance yourself from this Communist "friend"?
You may disagree and believe that this really isn't that big of a deal... but you can't simply dismiss this as all random events and a pure coincidence that Obama and Ayers worked together on a number of things. This was a political collusion between the two.I think you caught Obama on that one. He's in league with Ayers to stop the Vietnam war at all costs and convert this country into a communism.
Actually, about the only damning criticism you can make of an Ayer connection is the campaign contributions he made to his state legislature campaign.
I've served on boards with the same people repeatedly and honestly it doesn't mean shit. It just means the same people are suitable for the same interests. When, for example you're sitting on the curriculum advisory board for the accounting program of your alma mater- it's kinda gonna attract the same people year over year. They both live in Chicago and have interests in city projects; it's a conspiracy!
As for Ayer himself. He avoided prosecution due to a technicality and for the past 30 years hasn't been found guilty of anything since. I'm guessing that if you told a lie 30 years ago that means we should never trust you again. The guy fucked up. He's moved on. Like another once-terrorist who ended up a world leader: Nelson Mandela.
Parkbandit
10-13-2008, 02:05 PM
I think you caught Obama on that one. He's in league with Ayers to stop the Vietnam war at all costs and convert this country into a communism.
Actually, about the only damning criticism you can make of a Ayer connection is the campaign contributions he made to his state legislature campaign.
I've served on boards with the same people repeatedly and honestly it doesn't mean shit. It just means the same people are suitable for the same interests. When, for example you're sitting on the curriculum advisory board for the accounting program of your alma mater- it's kinda gonna attract the same sort of person year over year.
So, you are stating that if you found that you were on a board that had a domestic terrorist on it, you would not only be ok with of, but you would actively seek his advise on your political career? Obama hasn't been the least bit honest about this relationship, even claiming he had no idea who Ayers was until years later.
I might by this IF you aren't political and running for any elected office. I have a real difficult time believing this is truly a coincidence and that Ayers isn't using Obama to gain some political power.
Keller
10-13-2008, 02:07 PM
So, you are stating that if you found that you were on a board that had a domestic terrorist on it, you would not only be ok with of, but you would actively seek his advise on your political career? Obama hasn't been the least bit honest about this relationship, even claiming he had no idea who Ayers was until years later.
I might by this IF you aren't political and running for any elected office. I have a real difficult time believing this is truly a coincidence and that Ayers isn't using Obama to gain some political power.
Again PB. Obama has clearly stated that he just knows him from the neighborhood. We've got to take him at his word.
Clove
10-13-2008, 02:08 PM
So, you are stating that if you found that you were on a board that had a domestic terrorist on it, you would not only be ok with of, but you would actively seek his advise on your political career? Obama hasn't been the least bit honest about this relationship, even claiming he had no idea who Ayers was until years later.
I might by this IF you aren't political and running for any elected office. I have a real difficult time believing this is truly a coincidence and that Ayers isn't using Obama to gain some political power.I might if it had happened 30 years ago and he has been a successful (and lawful) professor ever since. Like I said Mandela also began his career as a terrorist (yes, he set bombs) and I would wholeheartedly seek his advice in politics- the man turned a country around.
Ayers has been waiting decades FOR JUST THIS OPPORTUNITY! Personally I think he's more interested in his classes and city projects.
Parkbandit
10-13-2008, 02:11 PM
I love the editing to excuse Ayers past. He's learned from his mistakes.. You know, planting bombs and stuff. And his interview a few years ago stating that the only thing he was sorry about is that they didn't do more.
Sorry, I'm far less forgiving than you are... Maybe that's why I failed at religion
I love the editing to excuse Ayers past. He's learned from his mistakes.. You know, planting bombs and stuff. And his interview a few years ago stating that the only thing he was sorry about is that they didn't do more.
Sorry, I'm far less forgiving than you are... Maybe that's why I failed at religion
But its not OK to take Palin at her word about the 'troopergate'.
Daniel
10-13-2008, 02:52 PM
Because we discuss things here. If you dont like the topic, or if it makes you uncomfortable - then you dont have to participate. In fact, you dont even have to click on the thread. Its that simple. No need to cry over it. Just dont click on it.
I did not realize that the discussion of Obama and Ayers was closed. I happen to think its a valid topic of discussion. As much validity in fact as Palin's ethics abuse. All topics such as these go to character and thus deserve to be on the table. What makes these topics even more suspicious is when there's huge attempts to suppress the dialigue.
Again, I'm not selling anything. I'm clearly voting for McCain/Palin. My record speaks for itself.
Winner winner, chicken dinner.
:lol:
:rofl:
Clove
10-13-2008, 02:57 PM
I love the editing to excuse Ayers past. He's learned from his mistakes.. You know, planting bombs and stuff. And his interview a few years ago stating that the only thing he was sorry about is that they didn't do more.
Sorry, I'm far less forgiving than you are... Maybe that's why I failed at religionAccording to Ayers that quote was taken out of context and he wrote a letter to the editor of the NYT complaining about it.
http://billayers.wordpress.com/2008/04/21/clarifying-the-facts-a-letter-to-the-new-york-times-9-15-2001/
Clarifying the Facts— a letter to the New York Times, 9-15-2001
September 15, 2001
To The Editors—
In July of this year Dinitia Smith asked my publisher if she might interview me for the New York Times on my forthcoming book, Fugitive Days. From the start she questioned me sharply about bombings, and each time I referred her to my memoir where I discussed the culture of violence we all live with in America, my growing anger in the 1960’s about the structures of racism and the escalating war, and the complex, sometimes extreme and despairing choices I made in those terrible times.
Smith’s angle is captured in the Times headline: “No regrets for a love of explosives” (September 11, 2001). She and I spoke a lot about regrets, about loss, about attempts to account for one’s life. I never said I had any love for explosives, and anyone who knows me found that headline sensationalistic nonsense. I said I had a thousand regrets, but no regrets for opposing the war with every ounce of my strength. I told her that in light of the indiscriminate murder of millions of Vietnamese, we showed remarkable restraint, and that while we tried to sound a piercing alarm in those years, in fact we didn’t do enough to stop the war.
Smith writes of me: “Even today, he ‘finds a certain eloquence to bombs, a poetry and a pattern from a safe distance,’ he writes.” This fragment seems to support her “love affair with bombs” thesis, but it is the opposite of what I wrote:
We’ll bomb them into the Stone Age, an unhinged American politician had intoned, echoing a gung-ho, shoot-from-the-hip general… each describing an American policy rarely spoken so plainly. Boom. Boom. Boom. Poor Viet Nam. Almost four times the destructive power Florida… How could we understand it? How could we take it in? Most important, what should we do about it? Bombs away. There is a certain eloquence to bombs, a poetry and a pattern from a safe distance. The rhythm of B-52s dropping bombs over Viet Nam, a deceptive calm at 40,000 feet as the doors ease open and millennial eggs are delivered on the green canopy below, the relentless thud of indiscriminate destruction and death without pause on the ground. Nothing subtle or syncopated. Not a happy rhythm. Three million Vietnamese lives were extinguished. Dig up Florida and throw it into the ocean. Annihilate Chicago or London or Bonn. Three million—each with a mother and a father, a distinct name, a mind and a body and a spirit, someone who knew him well or cared for her or counted on her for something or was annoyed or burdened or irritated by him; each knew something of joy or sadness or beauty or pain. Each was ripped out of this world, a little red dampness staining the earth, drying up, fading, and gone. Bodies torn apart, blown away, smudged out, lost forever.
I wrote about Vietnamese lives as a personal American responsibility, then, and the hypocrisy of claiming an American innocence as we constructed and stoked an intricate and hideous chamber of death in Asia. Clearly I wrote and spoke about the export of violence and the government’s love affair with bombs. Just as clearly Dinitia Smith was interested in her journalistic angle and not the truth. This is not a question of being misunderstood or “taken out of context,” but of deliberate distortion.
Some readers apparently responded to her piece, published on the same day as the vicious terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, by associating my book with them. This is absurd. My memoir is from start to finish a condemnation of terrorism, of the indiscriminate murder of human beings, whether driven by fanaticism or official policy. It begins literally in the shadow of Hiroshima and comes of age in the killing fields of Southeast Asia. My book criticizes the American obsession with a clean and distanced violence, and the culture of thoughtlessness and carelessness that results from it. We are now witnessing crimes against humanity in our own land on an unthinkable scale, and I fear that we might soon see innocent people in other parts of the world as well as in the U.S. dying and suffering in response.
All that we witnessed September 11—the awful carnage and pain, the heroism of ordinary people—may drive us mad with grief and anger, or it may open us to hope in new ways. Perhaps precisely because we have suffered we can embrace the suffering of others and gather the necessary wisdom to resist the impulse to lash out randomly. The lessons of the anti-war movements of the 1960s and 70s may be more urgent now than ever.
Bill Ayers Chicago, ILThis isn't really a question of being forgiving, it's simply a question of a person who isn't at all today what he was when he was 20.
:rofl:
...
At least you didn't forget :rofl: this time. We were worried about you.
Daniel
10-13-2008, 03:14 PM
I'm glad you picked up on my dig on PB.
I thought you were obtuse. How was I mistaken!
Keller
10-13-2008, 03:16 PM
This isn't really a question of being forgiving, it's simply a question of a person who isn't at all today what he was when he was 20.
Would the cover of your memoirs have you in a green mohawk?
According to Ayers that quote was taken out of context and he wrote a letter to the editor of the NYT complaining about it.
http://billayers.wordpress.com/2008/04/21/clarifying-the-facts-a-letter-to-the-new-york-times-9-15-2001/
This isn't really a question of being forgiving, it's simply a question of a person who isn't at all today what he was when he was 20.
Thought this was relevant in another Ayers piece I was just reading.
Near the end of the screenplay, Ayers discusses his political activism in a scene with his father and says, "Yeah we did some foolish things. I can't quite imagine putting a bomb in a building today, but the way things are in the world, I can't imagine entirely dismissing the possibility either. What if the government is killing a bunch of innocent people and just won't listen? And knowing now that trying to make a better life can lead to the guillotine, and the gulag, I still can't imagine a fully human world without utopian dreams."
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14321.html
Clove
10-13-2008, 03:58 PM
Well then I guess we'd better keep an eye on him.
Well then I guess we'd better keep an eye on him.
Definately.
Although, this article did give me a funny.
It sounds like the Ayers of today is trying to put the ultimate bomb in the ultimate building.
:whistle:
Parkbandit
10-13-2008, 05:16 PM
As for Ayer himself. He avoided prosecution due to a technicality and for the past 30 years hasn't been found guilty of anything since. I'm guessing that if you told a lie 30 years ago that means we should never trust you again. The guy fucked up. He's moved on. Like another once-terrorist who ended up a world leader: Nelson Mandela.
Yea, because telling a lie 30 years ago is the same exact thing as blowing up bombs. We should be just as forgiving in both cases.
Parkbandit
10-13-2008, 05:17 PM
I'm glad you picked up on my dig on PB.
I thought you were obtuse. How was I mistaken!
Sure it was. OR, maybe once again you were shown to be the little piece of shit hypocrite you've always been.. and had to perform a quick little Moonwalk.
But hey.. when you posted:
:rofl:
at least you didn't fabricate anything (well, except your reasoning for posting it)
Parkbandit
10-13-2008, 05:19 PM
Well then I guess we'd better keep an eye on him.
Or we could just forgive him for that little lie 30 years ago and hug it out.
Parkbandit
10-13-2008, 05:20 PM
Definately.
Although, this article did give me a funny.
It sounds like the Ayers of today is trying to put the ultimate bomb in the ultimate building.
:whistle:
At least now Obama and Osama have something more in common then their names..
They both know people who blew up the Pentagon.
http://www.funnyphotos.net.au/userimages/user756_1163641757.jpg
CrystalTears
10-13-2008, 05:23 PM
Tin foil hats is right. Holy fuck.
Someone needs to make an Obama: Manchurian Candidate poster...
http://www.impawards.com/2004/posters/manchurian_candidate_ver2.jpg
Keller
10-13-2008, 05:30 PM
Tin foil hats is right. Holy fuck.
We're just discussing current events. No need to get irrational!
Mighty Nikkisaurus
10-13-2008, 05:55 PM
http://anglopapist.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/tin-foil-hat.jpg
TheRoseLady
10-13-2008, 06:26 PM
Rofl my old lady saw an Obama/Biden bumper sticker the other day and said "I thought Obama Bin Biden was a terrorist.. why do people have have a bumper sticker for him?"
I didn't know what to say.
:rofl:
My husband isn't quite that bad, but sometimes I feel like I see the image of CRB rising up when he starts bitching about having to listen to "liberal" politics. It's tedious trying to tell him to STFU he has no idea without being blatant.
Mighty Nikkisaurus
10-13-2008, 06:32 PM
:rofl:
My husband isn't quite that bad, but sometimes I feel like I see the image of CRB rising up when he starts bitching about having to listen to "liberal" politics. It's tedious trying to tell him to STFU he has no idea without being blatant.
I have an uncle I'm really close to who is like a RL ClydeR.
We talk on the phone every few days but I have to cut him off before he starts talking about politics. He believes that Obama is in fact the Anti-Christ and will talk your ear off for two hours with why he believes that if you let him :rofl:
I still love him to pieces in spite of the nuttiness though.
TheRoseLady
10-13-2008, 06:43 PM
I think the most important thing to me is that Ayers selected Obama.
Why did this radical choose Obama? That's what is hard for me to stomach.
From Politico:
In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district's influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn....
"I can remember being one of a small group of people who came to Bill Ayers (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/bill-ayers)' house to learn that Alice Palmer was stepping down from the senate and running for Congress," said Dr. Quentin Young, a prominent Chicago physician and advocate for single-payer health care, of the informal gathering at the home of Ayers and his wife, Dohrn. "[Palmer] identified [Obama] as her successor."
Alice Palmer chose Barack. She was running for a House seat I think and when she either lost the primary or something along those lines, she came back and wanted to keep the slot that she had picked for Obama. Barack, was like...no way and went on to win the state seat. A clif notes version, sorta.
Daniel
10-13-2008, 07:08 PM
Sure it was. OR, maybe once again you were shown to be the little piece of shit hypocrite you've always been.. and had to perform a quick little Moonwalk.
But hey.. when you posted:
at least you didn't fabricate anything (well, except your reasoning for posting it)
Rofl
Warriorbird
10-13-2008, 07:17 PM
I think McCain's new "I have a plan strategy" is a lot more inspired than this bullshit.
Mabus
10-13-2008, 10:48 PM
Alice Palmer chose Barack.
To quote a CNN story:
"Alice Palmer says she in no way organized this meeting. She was invited and attended it briefly."
Keller
10-13-2008, 10:59 PM
Here's the story Mabus is referencing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvROBLortBQ&eurl=http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/10/cnn_actually_reports_on_ayerso_1.asp
Mabus
10-13-2008, 11:21 PM
Here's the story Mabus is referencing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvROBLortBQ&eurl=http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/10/cnn_actually_reports_on_ayerso_1.asp
And it still raises a lot of questions.
Why would Ayers pick Obama, who at the time had very little experience at anything, to chair such a large ($100 million) foundation?
Why would Obama lie (mislead, misconstrue, prevaricate, pick your word) about his relationship with, and when he knew of the past of, this domestic terrorist?
It is a matter of truthfulness, character and judgment about the formation of Obama's political career.
TheRoseLady
10-14-2008, 06:03 PM
And it still raises a lot of questions.
Why would Obama lie (mislead, misconstrue, prevaricate, pick your word) about his relationship with, and when he knew of the past of, this domestic terrorist?
When did Obama lie about his relationship with Ayers? Show me the citation.
Keller
10-14-2008, 06:05 PM
When did Obama lie about his relationship with Ayers? Show me the citation.
If Mabus has an affection for anything it is for the overuse, misuse, and plain abuse, of the word "lie"
TheRoseLady
10-14-2008, 06:19 PM
Why would Ayers pick Obama, who at the time had very little experience at anything, to chair such a large ($100 million) foundation?
FYI from Factcheck.org
[Stanley] Kurtz originally claimed that Ayers somehow was responsible for installing Obama as head of the board, speculating in his "cover-up" article that Obama "almost certainly received the job at the behest of Bill Ayers." But after days of poring over the records, he failed to produce any evidence of that in his Wall Street Journal article. To the contrary, Ayers was not involved in the choice, according to Deborah Leff, then president of the Joyce Foundation. She told the Times, and confirmed to FactCheck.org, that she recommended Obama for the position to Patricia Graham of the Spencer Foundation. Graham told us that she asked Obama (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/us/politics/04ayers.html?ref=politics) if he'd become chairman; he accepted, provided Graham would be vice-chair.
The bipartisan board of directors, which did not include Ayers, elected Obama chairman, and he served in that capacity from 1995 to 1999, awarding grants for projects and raising matching funds. Ayers headed up a separate arm of the group, working with grant recipients. According to another board member, Ayers "was not significantly involved with the challenge after Obama was appointed." One possible reason had little to do with Obama himself, but instead was related to cautions about conflicts of interest; the group was funding some of Ayers' own alternative school projects.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.