Next President of the United States

[donut]

recently, a Democratic operative pointed out that when Obama holds a rally 25-30,000 people show up, whereas when McCain holds one, he only draws 10-15,000.

The Republican spokesman replied, "That's because McCain's supporters are at work."

[August]

Originally Posted by Mikhayl

How nice :

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008...selections2008

Yeah I know. Imagine a potential US President associating with a murdering mad bomber.

[Tchocky]

Ayers never killed anyone, as far as I remember.

And seriously, Obama was eight years old when the Weathermen were active, and sat on a board with a former member. Excuse me if I'm not breaking out in a rash.

[Torps]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Ayers never killed anyone, as far as I remember.

And seriously, Obama was eight years old when the Weathermen were active, and sat on a board with a former member. Excuse me if I'm not breaking out in a rash.

Obama's friends at work

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opi...,2217005.story

http://www.stoptheaclu.com/archives/...raud-attempts/

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...WS03/809140383

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/08/07...-on-your-dime/

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/stor...1%7D&dist=hppr

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/.../post_124.html


Oh "Main Stream Media" were are you?!?! oh wait your pro Obama!

[August]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Ayers never killed anyone, as far as I remember.

Google Brian V. McDonnell. Then there are the three Weathermen terrorists, and they were just that, who managed to blow themselves up while preparing a bomb that according to the FBI was enough to level the entire block had it all gone up.

No doubt about it, Ayers most definitely has blood on his hands.

Bottom line here though is why does the casualty count make any difference? In the words of Harvey Klehr, the Andrew W. Mellon professor of politics and history at Emory University in Atlanta, said in 2003: "The only reason they were not guilty of mass murder is mere incompetence. I don't know what sort of defense that is."

And seriously, Obama was eight years old when the Weathermen were active, and sat on a board with a former member. Excuse me if I'm not breaking out in a rash.

Really?, so how many former IRA or UDA terrorists do you consort with? Don't you think an association with them might say something about you, that it might be a valid consideration if you were running for high political office?

And it was more than he just sat on a board with a former member, it was the founder and leader of the group.

Seriously, alone this might be excusable, put it down to youthful poor judgement, but you add a 20 year association with a radical minister who also advocates the violent overthrow of this country and we begin to see a pattern. A pattern, imo, that indicates more than just poor judgement or ignorance.

What I don't understand is why wasn't that Weatherman - guy in jail in the first place if he's supposedly such an outlaw and an overall evil person? If he's not a criminal in eyes of the law then what do the rest of us have to say about it? I mean, isn't the US the land of freedom where even people like W and Cheney can run around free as summer lambs even if they are guilty of the deaths of hundreds of thousands?

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by August

Google Brian V. McDonnell. Then there are the three Weathermen terrorists, and they were just that, who managed to blow themselves up while preparing a bomb that according to the FBI was enough to level the entire block had it all gone up.

No doubt about it, Ayers most definitely has blood on his hands.

Bottom line here though is why does the casualty count make any difference? In the words of Harvey Klehr, the Andrew W. Mellon professor of politics and history at Emory University in Atlanta, said in 2003: "The only reason they were not guilty of mass murder is mere incompetence. I don't know what sort of defense that is."

It made a difference when I thought he hadn't killed anyone. The word murderer is too significant to be thrown around lightly.
Still, the question that logically follows from all of this is - has Ayers' thinking seriously affected the political beliefs of Barack Obama? The answer I can see is that if we are talking about the work of the Woods Fund, possibly. Poverty relief forms a plank in Obama's policy statements. If we are talking about the Weathermen, and the actions of the 1970's, then they have not. Obama has specifically rejected this idea, as have people like Michael Kinsley, certainly no friend of Ayers.
Do you believe that through their limited interactions, Ayers has instructed Obama in the methods that he himself has rejected?

Really?, so how many former IRA or UDA terrorists do you consort with? Don't you think an association with them might say something about you, that it might be a valid consideration if you were running for high political office?

I know a few people who have been in and out of jail, actually. For despicable things. I know a few people who have been victims, too. It makes little difference to who I am and what I believe. Growing up in the border region before the Good Friday Agreement means that it's impossible not to know people who have been involved. Much like being part of the academic establishment in a cosmopolitan city. It comes with the territory.

And it was more than he just sat on a board with a former member, it was the founder and leader of the group.

OK, so Ayers was more than a rank-and-file Weatherman. We knew that already. What difference does this make to Obama's personality?

Seriously, alone this might be excusable, put it down to youthful poor judgement, but you add a 20 year association with a radical minister who also advocates the violent overthrow of this country and we begin to see a pattern. A pattern, imo, that indicates more than just poor judgement or ignorance.

Then what does it indicate? Do you think that Obama believes in the same things the Ayers does? And if so, are they Ayers ideas of the 2000's, when he was in contact with Obama, or are they the ideas of the 1970's, when Obama was eight years old?

Violent overthrow of the US government. Well, the reaction to that really depends on the reason for it. If you call for violence in reaction to abortion, you get to go to lunch with President Ford.

And President Reagan.

And President George HW Bush.

There does come a time when force, even physical force, is appropriate... A true Christian in Hitler's Germany and in the occupied countries should have defied the false and counterfeit state. This brings us to a current issue that is crucial for the future of the church in the United States, the issue of abortion... It is time we consciously realize that when any office commands what is contrary to God's law it abrogates it's authority. And our loyalty to the God who gave this law then requires that we make the appropriate response in that situation...

Francis Schaeffer - A Christian Manifesto.

[August]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

If you call for violence in reaction to abortion, you get to go to lunch with President Ford.

And President Reagan.

And President George HW Bush.

I'd be interested in hearing the person or persons you're talking about here.

[August]

Obama supporters are getting scary!

[Digital_Trucker]

Originally Posted by August

Obama supporters are getting scary!

Well, he did say that there should be a "civilian defense force" with a budget as high as the militaries*. Maybe that's the beginning of it

* about 16:54

[Hylander_1314]

Originally Posted by Digital_Trucker

Well, he did say that there should be a "civilian defense force" with a budget as high as the militaries*. Maybe that's the beginning of it

* about 16:54

Hey DT, aren't we according to the 2nd Ammendment supposed to already have a civilian defence force? I think it was called the malitia. Every able bodied male between 18 and 45 is supposed to meet one weekend a month to drill. Also supply your own firearms, and supplies. If I remember correctly.

[Torps]

Originally Posted by August

Obama supporters are getting scary!

UM Can we say Hitler Youth for Obama?

[Digital_Trucker]

Hylander, not according to this interpretation

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/gun...damendment.htm

I believe the military has replaced the civilian militia (except in the case of the militia guarding our Southern borders).

[August]

Originally Posted by Digital_Trucker

Hylander, not according to this interpretation

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/gun...damendment.htm

I believe the military has replaced the civilian militia (except in the case of the militia guarding our Southern borders).

That site is outdated I believe. I didn't see the recent SC ruling on the DC hand gun ban.

And BTW the military is not the militia and without a constitutional amendment to that effect should not be considered as such.

[Hylander_1314]

Sounds like a lot of hogwash to me. A bunch of commie liberal tree hugger propaganda, except this set of lines,

The Constitution aside, bearing arms is a fundamental human right. It is the only means the American people have to reclaim control of their government, should it one day become irredeemably corrupt.

With the 2nd Ammendment, we at least have the right to stand up in a last great act in defiance in the face of tyranny.