McCain and Obama

[Scumurculum]

then a far-leftist like Obama or a
mild-leftist like McCain

Huh what? does that make Bush a centralist?

Guys I hope to goodness you are joking.

 

[Len44]

Perhaps the most important thing is that we will FINALLY see the end of Bush!!!

My choice is dictated by all the reasons (an more) General Colin Powell articulated this past weekend...

 

[Len44]

.....to "spread the wealth around" When Obama is off the teleprompter (sp?) he says what is in his heart, and if you really listen its pretty scary if you ask me. But maybe the my good friends have to go.

Doug - out

"Spread the Wealth" is OK when McCain / Bush / Palin push for the bail-out (to save their big banker friends), but not OK when Obama wants to repeal the extreme tax breaks given by Bushy to the wealthiest one-tenth of one percent of Americans?

Man, some folks are getting so desperate that they're trying to take any innocent phrase and perform tortured gymnastics to get it to mean whatever they want. Sheeze!

That's just ridiculous. Keep trying, tho. I'm sure if enough stuff is thrown up against the wall, that something will stick sooner or later...

 

[Gordon]

I've been following this thread closely and enjoy the banter and am surprised it has not become a blood bath.

While I see good and bad in both sides, I vote third party so I look at the 2 parties objectively. Obama's "spread the wealth" statement is not off base if you look at the history of our country. The trickle down theory says if it is good for the rich, then wealth will trickle down to the less fortunate. Fine in theory, but the CEO and upper management of my company makes in excess of 400 times what the average person in the company makes. There has been no trickle down here only trickle up.

Also take for example the Earned Income Credit come tax time. If a person does not earn a certain wage, the government cuts a substantial check to that family. Is that not a "spread the wealth" program?

Now take into account the TARP or bailout both parties bought into. I guess "spreading the pain" is more acceptable then the wealth.

 

[Rich]

Feh. An "R" next to a politician's name does not a conservative make. True conservatives and libertarians aptly describe the aforementioned as
"RINOs"...Republican In Name Only.

Brian,

I actually agree with most of what you say. The problem for you and other Libertarians / true conservatives is that the republican party is no longer a party of constitutional conservatism. It was hijacked by the evangelical right in order to push the policies of social conservatives (re: abortion, definition of marriage, bringing religion into the schools, etc.). I think many of these religious conservatives don't really understand the principles of constitutional and fiscal conservatism like you do. I think this melding of religious conservatism with true conservatism occurred during the Reagan era and I believe what we are seeing now is a backlash from true conservatives who are fed up with the social/moral agendas of the religious right taking precedence over true conservative principles, especially in the past eight years.

McCain has tried to be a centrist through most of his time in the Senate. I believe this has less to do with his own principles and more to do with what he needed to do to get elected and then re-elected in Arizona. He figured out in the 2000 primaries that he could not play that game and get elected to be the republican nominee, so for this election he has intentionally tried to position himself more to the right. When that wasn't working very well, he brought Palin on board to appeal to the conservative christian base of the republican party. That paid some dividends in that regard, but it cost him among independents and swing voters.

I think you do a disservice to yourself to just dismiss these endorsements by conservatives as a bunch of RINO's leaning left. These are people who have consistently registered republican, served in republican administrations, run businesses, been renowned economists, and written for conservative journals. They are intelligent, thoughtful, capable people who have been a welcome part of the republican party for many years. They are generally fiscal conservatives. The fact that they have jumped ship to endorse Obama in this campaign should be a clear signal to you and others that the republican party is in trouble. It has alienated those who hold many of its core principles dear. I would place most of the blame for this on GWB, who has appealed to hawks and evangelicals, while ignoring the basic conservative values of smaller, less-intrusive government and fiscal restraint. You are correct that both parties are morphing over time, and neither resembles what they were 30, 40, or 50 years ago.

I also think you would like to paint Obama as further leftist than he really is. He is not a socialist or a communist, anymore than McCain is a fascist. These are just rhetorical labels that we use in this country to get people riled up against the opposition. Obama certainly leans more liberal than many, although I would bet that he is not nearly as liberal as, say, Pelosi (who I am not a fan of, by the way). I think you will find that he tries to govern in a reasonable, centrist manner, despite all the fear-mongering that has been going on this election that he will turn us into a communist country.

 

[Rich]

.....to "spread the wealth around" When Obama is off the teleprompter (sp?) he says what is in his heart, and if you really listen its pretty scary if you ask me. But maybe the my good friends have to go.

Doug - out

Doug,

Do you make more than a quarter million a year? If not, then what are you afraid of with Obama's tax plan? Personally, I am retired early and living off my investments. I pay more in taxes each year than most people earn in five. I did get a nice cut in my taxes with Bush's tax cuts. But did I really need it? No. I would have much preferred to have continued to pay the higher taxes, not engage in an unnecessary war, and pay down the national debt and balance the budget. It is time we stopped thinking in terms of tax and spend liberals vs. conservative right-wingers and realize that we are all Americans and our government is falling apart and failing us completely. And the partisanship that divides us is part of the reason.

If we do not balance our budget, figure out a way to meet our energy needs in an environmentally-safe manner, repair our infrastructure and school systems, figure out a way to provide basic health care for all of our citizens, manage to provide religious freedom for all while preventing religious oppression of those who believe differently than the majority, equalize the gap between rich and poor and bolster the diminishing middle class, and balance our budget and trade deficits, then this country is headed for a disaster of unprecedented proportions. These are not partisan issues and they don't have a liberal or conservative answer. These are national issues and the answers are as complex as the problems.

Let's not forget the lessons of history. A lot of revolutions have occurred because the rich kept getting richer while the poor kept getting poorer. Corruption and greed in government (on both sides of the aisle) is more than likely to be our downfall if we can't get a handle on it.

 

[tsmooth]

I also think you would like to paint Obama as further leftist than he really is. He is not a socialist or a communist, anymore than McCain is a fascist. These are just rhetorical labels that we use in this country to get people riled up against the opposition. Obama certainly leans more liberal than many, although I would bet that he is not nearly as liberal as, say, Pelosi (who I am not a fan of, by the way). I think you will find that he tries to govern in a reasonable, centrist manner, despite all the fear-mongering that has been going on this election that he will turn us into a communist country.

Sorry Rich, but that is just untrue. He can't be any futher left.

"Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was the most liberal senator in 2007, according to National Journal's 27th annual vote ratings. The insurgent presidential candidate shifted further to the left last year in the run-up to the primaries, after ranking as the 16th- and 10th-most-liberal during his first two years in the Senate. "

The man to unite both parties has a worst party line vote then the “90% like Bush” we hear about in the polictial ads.

I do agree with what you say about the problems within the Republican Party. If things go as they look like they are, we are going to have a Democratic President, House, and Senate (with no ability to filibuster). I would ask you to visit this article about “A liberal Supermajority”:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html

What I believe is happening now is an extreme correction for what people see going on in the Republican Party. Hopefully this November will be viewed as a “wake up call” so some seats can be won back in 2010.

 

[HsvToolFool]

fat people do not fight civil wars !!! this country has more fatties than all the world.
I would say lately I fit into this category

HA! Me too. But we fatties also scuba dive, sky dive, hang glide, bungie jump,
and hunt. All for amusement. Why we even garden, sew, remodel our
houses, and build furniture.

Obama has close ties to ACORN, a sketchy organization convicted for
voter fraud in 12 States and indicted in 3 others. Even knowing they
are under close scrutiny by the FBI, I seriously doubt they can resist more
voter fraud in key states like Ohio, Missouri, and Florida.

I suspect the legal aftermath of gross, widespread voter fraud is one
of the few things that could inspire real violence amongst us fat, lazy
Americans.

The problem for you and other Libertarians / true conservatives is that the republican party is no longer a party of constitutional conservatism.

No argument. And I hope Rep leadership like McCain aren't so naive
to think they would be spared in an uprising. I will never forgive McCain
for McCain-Feingold. That law's potential for abuse is atrocious. Obama
and his cronies are already showing too much zeal abusing the legal
system to silence political opposition.

It was hijacked by the evangelical right in order to push the policies of social conservatives (re: abortion, definition of marriage, bringing religion into the schools, etc.).

The Dems and Reps are essentially the same in the respect that these issues
aren't to be resolved, but are useful tools which stir up your base.

But I must disagree with your religious-takeover analysis. Being against
abortion or supporting voluntary school prayer does not make you a
religious zealot.

We "South Park Conservatives" are certainly fed up, just not on the
grounds you state. We have almost no voice in government or
the media. Rush Limbaugh is so popular for that reason.

I also think you would like to paint Obama as further leftist than he really is.

Emperical evidence is ignored at your own peril. There is no better gauge
of Obama's character and judgement than his long-term relationships with
unapologetic marxists and blatant racists for political gain.

The litmus test for bias is simply reversing the scenario onto McCain. How
would you react to long-standing associations between McCain and an "activist"
who led a group devoted to bombing abortion clinics? Add another parallel:
McCain attended a church for 20 years led by a preacher who believes
that black people were descended from the devil and Jesus was Aryan.
What would that say about McCain's character?

I think you will find that he tries to govern in a reasonable, centrist manner...

I agree. Neither he nor McCain has much choice on the matter. Any
aggressive moves will tip Congressional elections to the other Party.

In his first term, Clinton ran on a platform of middle-class tax cuts to
appear a moderate. Bush Sr. then lost mostly because of his "Read my
lips" fiasco which infuriated his base so much that almost 20% voted
for Perot. Before even taking office, Clinton reneged on his campaign promise
and later made tax increases retro-active in his first term. Hillary then opened
up a can of Nationalized Health Care. Two years later, the result was a
Republican majority in both House and Sentate for the first time in
40 years.

But nobody is fooled by Obama's "I'm a moderate" pretense. If it
walks like a duck, talks like a duck, etc. Nationalized healthcare? I
just wanna "spread the wealth" Joe Plumber? Excuse me, how frikkin
"progressive" do you have to be before crossing the line into actual
marxism?

 

[Rich]

There is no better gauge
of Obama's character and judgement than his long-term relationships with
unapologetic marxists and blatant racists for political gain.

Sorry, Brian. I just don't buy into the "guilt by association" argument with respect to Ayers and Wright. I thought Letterman did a great job of showing the futility of that argument when he brought up Liddy. Boy, did McCain look like a deer in the headlights on that one.

It is unfortunate for McCain that he spent so much time and effort on the Ayers issue. If he had spent more time talking about the issues and less time trying to paint Obama as an elitist, socialist and terrorist, he may have had a chance in this election. But it was clear that he wanted to try to smear Obama's character and not discuss the issues, and I think the majority of American's are just fed up with that kind of politics, especially with so many important issues and an economic crunch going on.

But nobody is fooled by Obama's "I'm a moderate" pretense. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, etc. Nationalized healthcare? I just wanna "spread the wealth" Joe Plumber? Excuse me, how frikkin "progressive" do you have to be before crossing the line into actual marxism?

As for "nationalized healthcare," Obama has proposed nothing of the sort. The fact that you call it that says a lot about how informed you are of his policies. Here is a quick read on what he is proposing.

I have a couple of questions for you. Did you know that we spend more on health care in this country than any other country in the world, yet our health care system is ranked #37 by the World Health Organization? Did you know that we are the ONLY wealthy, industrialized nation in the World that doesn't have some form of Universal Healthcare? All european countries do, and most of them are ranked ahead of us on the WHO list. I think we are due for a little reform in this area and I don't think recognizing that makes Obama a socialist. If so, then all our European allies, including the Brits, France, Germany, Austria, Sweden, and many others, are all socialists.

Frankly, I am tired of living in a country where someone that is out of work cannot afford to buy health insurance. I pay for my own health insurance and it is ungodly what it costs. And I am never sick! I am also tired of living in a country where my treatment decisions are not made by my doctor, but are instead made by HMO's and Insurance companies. Yes, I think we need a little reform in this area.

And as for Joe the Plumber, go back and read the text of Obama's answer to Joe. He gave a long, well-reasoned explanation that basically said that Joe would have received a tax cut under Obama's plan for all these years he has been working and if he continued to work at his current salary, but that if Joe did buy the business and if it did make over a quarter million dollars a year in profits, then his taxes on the quarter million in revenues would not change, but his tax rate on the amount over a quarter million would rise by 3%, which is what it was under Clinton. So if Joe makes $300,000 in PROFIT, then his taxes would go up by a whopping $1,500 under Obama's plan! And for this, you accuse him of being a marxist?

The reason I go to that long explanation is because McCain, and you, ignored the entirety of what Obama said except for three words: "spread the wealth." And you seized on those three words to try to paint a hyperbolic picture of Obama as a socialist. So you are going to freak out because a guy making $300,000 in profits pays an extra $1500 in taxes? While 95% of taxpayers, making a whole lot less than that, are going to get a tax break? I really don't see where the problem is. And I say this as one of the ones who will be paying the higher taxes.

 

[Rich]

Sorry Rich, but that is just untrue. He can't be any futher left.

"Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was the most liberal senator in 2007, according to National Journal's 27th annual vote ratings. The insurgent presidential candidate shifted further to the left last year in the run-up to the primaries, after ranking as the 16th- and 10th-most-liberal during his first two years in the Senate. "

The problem here is that you use his last year's voting record showing he was the "most liberal" to paint him as furthest-left leaning Senator. Yet, in the preceding two years he was ranked 16th and 10th. Obviously, he knew he was going to be in a primary battle with Hillary Clinton and in the last year he tried to position himself further left for that reason. That is just smart politics.

But how reliable is this survey as an indicator really? Would you say Hillary Clinton is liberal or not? Because one year it ranked her 8th most liberal and then the next year it ranked her 34th most liberal! Well, which is it? Did her political/social views change that much in a year? Obviously this is a pretty unreliable statistic, especially with only a few years of data on Obama.

I would also note that they didn't even bother to create a rating for McCain because he missed more than half the votes that they were looking at. What's up with that? I think I might rather have a liberal Senator that does his job than a conservative??? one that doesn't.

You are going to have to do better than this survey to prove Obama couldn't be any further left. Granted, he is a politician, and a shrewd one at that. But he is not nearly as liberal as some of those guys, probably not even near as liberal as his running mate. But that's all right. I like him even if he isn't the most liberal Senator in the Senate.

 

[slowGEEZR]

Already voted!

Man, it's easy to vote in Texas. It didn't take but about five minutes from the time I walked in the door until my voting was completed!

 

[Len44]

Yeah Yeah, Yeah, Yeah...

Same old same old tired Rush stuff. In 2004, John Kerry was the most liberal Senator.

There are some (OK, I will refrain from using a further descriptor here) who seem to go absolutely nuts over the term "liberal," mostly because this term has been demonized by certain extremists (Rove, et al) for political purposes.
Pretty sad, really. And divisive, hurting our Country, just for political advantage.

 

[HsvToolFool]

Sorry, Brian. I just don't buy into the "guilt by association" argument...

An argument which is yours, not mine.

That response is a perfect example of what I meant by being so polarized
that rational debate is impossible.

You are wilfully ignoring the obvious point and instead create an irrelevant
Straw Man: "not guilty by association". No one claims Obama is guilty of
terrorist or racist acts. There's no evidence of such conduct from Obama.
You're just avoiding the issue.

Only a fool associates with people who clearly are criminals, terrorists,
and racists. Obama obviously found their odious philosophies palatable
enough to endure them for decades. These aren't people he met at a party,
or "friend of a friend" types. Obama not only tolerated their company, it's
their money and political connections that got him elected. These are long-time
confederates, most of whom played essential roles in Obama's political career.
McCain is friends with G. Gordon Liddy? What a poor moral equivalence next to
Obama's buddy-list of radicals...

William Ayers / Bernardine Dohrn - Proof that even marxist terrorists can
have a successful marriage. Connected to Obama since around 1988 and
largely responsible for Obama's career. Obama owes Ayers everything,
from his first job to his first election. Ayers probably has enough dirt on
Obama to completely control him. Tom Ayers, father of William and CEO
of Commonwealth Edison, was strongly connected to the Chicago political
machine. If you were wondering how a marxist unibomber became so politically
connected, the answer is nepotism. No doubt little Billy was well-tutored in
the fine art of extortion. That's the Chi-CAH-go way.

Tony Rezko - Obama associate since 1990. Strong ties to Nation of Islam.
Advised and raised funds for Obama during first state senate bid in 1995.
Now a convicted felon serving time for kickback schemes.

Nadhmi Auchi - Iraqi billionaire financer of Rezko. Ties to political
corruption in Chicago (financed Obama's Chicago mansion kickback
via Rezko), France, and Iraq (tied to Saddam and the infamous
Oil For Food Scandal). US State Dept presently denies him a visa.

Khalid Al-Mansour (aka Texas-born Donald Warden) - Advisor to
Saudi royal family, which is source of his money. Friend of Bill Ayers who then
hooked him up with Obama to allegedly fund Obama's Harvard education.
Islamist and anti-semite author of several books about overthrowing western
civilization.

Rashid Khalidi - Former PLO terrorist. Obama family friend since
mid-1990s, met at Columbia. Founded Arab American Action Network (AAAN),
an anti-Israel activist group. This is the only Obama buddy which parallels the
McCain/Liddy friendship.

Jerimiah Wright - Retired pastor, full-time racist. Obama's pastor for
20 years, baptized Obama's kids. Ideal bowling teammates: Fred Phelps
and Jessie Jackson.

It's delusional to believe that Obama was an innocent lamb who moved to
Chicago, got elected via William Ayers and a few other nasty folk's connections,
then accidentally attended a racist hate-cult for 20 years. Obama knowingly
courted William Ayers to exploit his local connections. He also knowingly
attended that vile church to establish himself as part of the "community".

Outside New Jersey and New Orleans, Chicago is the most corrupt political
machine in America. No politician could swim laps in that cesspool for 20 years
without being severely tainted. Absolutely no good can come from Obama's
political roots there, which is why the topic is taboo in the mainstream media.
The list above is probably the tip of a very big, stinky iceberg.

During the 1992 campaign, the mainstream press refused to investigate Clinton's
past regarding Whitewater, TrooperGate, and Juanita Broaddrick's ****
accusations. Ignoring glaring evidence of Slick Willy's lack of ethics eventually
resulted in a major Constitutional crisis.

Learning more about Obama's Chicago ties before the election is essential,
but the media is too emotionally invested in Obama to even think about
serious investigations. History is repeating itself.

 

[Len44]

During the 1992 campaign, the mainstream press refused to investigate Clinton's past regarding Whitewater, TrooperGate, and Juanita Broaddrick's ****
accusations. Ignoring glaring evidence of Slick Willy's lack of ethics eventually
resulted in a major Constitutional crisis.

Learning more about Obama's Chicago ties before the election is essential,
but the media is too emotionally invested in Obama to even think about
serious investigations. History is repeating itself.

I seriously, seriously, hope you are not suggesting that our Country has been better off with Shrub as President than it was with Bill Clinton...

I mean, really!!!

 

[Rich]

Brian,
Care to cite any credible sources for all of your "factual" statements about Obama's alleged associates?

 

[Gordon Gray]

An argument which is yours, not mine.

That response is a perfect example of what I meant by being so polarized
that rational debate is impossible.

You are wilfully ignoring the obvious point and instead create an irrelevant
Straw Man: "not guilty by association". No one claims Obama is guilty of
terrorist or racist acts. There's no evidence of such conduct from Obama.
You're just avoiding the issue.

Only a fool associates with people who clearly are criminals, terrorists,
and racists. Obama obviously found their odious philosophies palatable
enough to endure them for decades. These aren't people he met at a party,
or "friend of a friend" types. Obama not only tolerated their company, it's
their money and political connections that got him elected. These are long-time
confederates, most of whom played essential roles in Obama's political career.
McCain is friends with G. Gordon Liddy? What a poor moral equivalence next to
Obama's buddy-list of radicals...

William Ayers / Bernardine Dohrn - Proof that even marxist terrorists can
have a successful marriage. Connected to Obama since around 1988 and
largely responsible for Obama's career. Obama owes Ayers everything,
from his first job to his first election. Ayers probably has enough dirt on
Obama to completely control him. Tom Ayers, father of William and CEO
of Commonwealth Edison, was strongly connected to the Chicago political
machine. If you were wondering how a marxist unibomber became so politically
connected, the answer is nepotism. No doubt little Billy was well-tutored in
the fine art of extortion. That's the Chi-CAH-go way.

Tony Rezko - Obama associate since 1990. Strong ties to Nation of Islam.
Advised and raised funds for Obama during first state senate bid in 1995.
Now a convicted felon serving time for kickback schemes.

Nadhmi Auchi - Iraqi billionaire financer of Rezko. Ties to political
corruption in Chicago (financed Obama's Chicago mansion kickback
via Rezko), France, and Iraq (tied to Saddam and the infamous
Oil For Food Scandal). US State Dept presently denies him a visa.

Khalid Al-Mansour (aka Texas-born Donald Warden) - Advisor to
Saudi royal family, which is source of his money. Friend of Bill Ayers who then
hooked him up with Obama to allegedly fund Obama's Harvard education.
Islamist and anti-semite author of several books about overthrowing western
civilization.

Rashid Khalidi - Former PLO terrorist. Obama family friend since
mid-1990s, met at Columbia. Founded Arab American Action Network (AAAN),
an anti-Israel activist group. This is the only Obama buddy which parallels the
McCain/Liddy friendship.

Jerimiah Wright - Retired pastor, full-time racist. Obama's pastor for
20 years, baptized Obama's kids. Ideal bowling teammates: Fred Phelps
and Jessie Jackson.

It's delusional to believe that Obama was an innocent lamb who moved to
Chicago, got elected via William Ayers and a few other nasty folk's connections,
then accidentally attended a racist hate-cult for 20 years. Obama knowingly
courted William Ayers to exploit his local connections. He also knowingly
attended that vile church to establish himself as part of the "community".

Outside New Jersey and New Orleans, Chicago is the most corrupt political
machine in America. No politician could swim laps in that cesspool for 20 years
without being severely tainted. Absolutely no good can come from Obama's
political roots there, which is why the topic is taboo in the mainstream media.
The list above is probably the tip of a very big, stinky iceberg.

During the 1992 campaign, the mainstream press refused to investigate Clinton's
past regarding Whitewater, TrooperGate, and Juanita Broaddrick's ****
accusations. Ignoring glaring evidence of Slick Willy's lack of ethics eventually
resulted in a major Constitutional crisis.

Learning more about Obama's Chicago ties before the election is essential,
but the media is too emotionally invested in Obama to even think about
serious investigations. History is repeating itself.

Yes Brian.

We must FEAR, FEAR, AND FEAR.

Sorry, I think we have all gotten very tired of the W and the Republican playbook and I believe, come 11/5, the American electorate will resoundingly reject this brain washing strategy.

 

[Len44]

Yes Brian.

We must FEAR, FEAR, AND FEAR.

Sorry, I think we have all gotten very tired of the W and the Republican playbook and I believe, come 11/5, the American electorate will resoundingly reject this brain washing strategy.

Heck, I just wish that it was ILLEGAL to run lie after lie in political ads...

I readily admit to being for Obama, but those McCain ads are pretty outrageous...and a number of them are gross distortions of the truth. I'm both mad and sad about this...

 

[HsvToolFool]

What is a "credible source" nowadays? AP, Reuters, NY Times?

Mainstream media Leftist have no credibilty. Their bias led them
into scandals like RatherGate, published dozens of obviously
Photoshopped and staged images as authentic, and
published dastardly lies about American soldiers. As I
mentioned at the end of my previous post, mainstream
media will never mine Obama's past as it should.

Most of the above journalistic scandals were exposed by
amatuers with no resources other than common sense and
deduction. So let's go with today's credible journalists:
bloggers. Which is to say, you and me. Let's see what
Google turns up and decide for ourselves if it's credible...

The only person I mentioned which Obama himself has
not recognized as a friend or associate is Khalid Al-Mansour.
Both parties are very mum on their common past. It was
actually NY former Black Panther lawyer Percy Sutton who
broke the Obama/Mansour/Harvard connection.

Obama's most damaging skeleton in the closet is Ayers
and Dohrn, of course. Obama blantantly lied about his
history with Ayers during the nomination process. He was
never a guy who "just lives in my neighborhood." There
is an undeniable, close association going back to 1995.

However, evidence indicates they probably began their
relationship many years before in the late 1980s.

Obama, a first-year student at Harvard, was hired as a
summer intern in 1989 at the Sidley Austin law firm. Also
hired as intern was Bernardine Dohrn, a convicted felon
who can never practice law and William Ayers wife. Both
hires are extremely unusual until you consider that
nepotism and political favors were at work.

Tom Ayers, Chicago politcal big-wig and father of William
Ayers, was a close friend of Howard Trienens who was the
managing partner of the firm. There is little doubt that
Tom Ayers got Obama and his daughter-in-law their jobs
at the request of his son, terrorist William Ayers.

Obama's 1995 memoir admits only one person as writing
an endorsement to Harvard on his behalf: Northwestern
University professor and extreme Leftist John L. McKnight.
By his own admission, Obama valued McKnight's tutelage
as a "community organizer" even more than his Harvard
education. Since both Tom Ayers and Howard Trienens
were also Northwestern board of trustee members, it's
quite possible Obama met Tom and William Ayers through
McKnight rather than the other way around. But that's not
exactly a comforting thought either.

CliffNotes version: Obama is hiding a lot about his Leftist,
activist past.

 

[HsvToolFool]

Heck, I just wish that it was ILLEGAL to run lie after lie in political ads...

Ignoring the fact such laws infringe freedom of speech,
do you not understand the real peril involved? It's the
same fatal flaw as "hate speech" laws.

Who defines what is truth? Who defines hate speech? A
politician? A committee? A judge? Who appoints the judge
or committee? The oligarchy with that power becomes
instant dictator. They make up all the rules. They can jail
you for anything you say or print. 'Cause it will be lie.
Or hate speech. 'Cause they said so.

For example, hate speech laws are already being abused to
silence politcal commentary in Canada and Great Brittain.
You can still carry a sign like "Kill the Jews" or "Bush is
Satan", but you'll be prosecuted for publishing the dreaded
Danish Muhammad Cartoons.

Truth and falsehood in political debates are exposed in the
arena of ideas, not by a committee or in a courtroom. If a
political ad contains lies, what harm does it do? The victim
can destroy the liar's credibility simply by exposing the
truth. If he can't expose the truth, then the allegations are
true and/or the victim doesn't have what it takes to be a
leader. Likewise, someone who doesn't expose an opponent
with a scurrilous past has failed his public duty and is a
poor leader.

 

[Len44]

Boogity, Boogity, Boogity!!!

Even John McCain has said that Obama is a good, decent man who wants the best for our Country, just like almost all of us who are fortunate enough to live here in this great land.

Like Rich stated, do you have ANY -- Repeat, ANY -- CREDIBLE sources??? So far this plays like some far out fantasy...sounds a lot like the hate-mongering Rush...