How low and pathetic.

I can guess in advance that he will say that he was not referring to Palin.

But smart folk will know this is not true. If Palin would have never made the lipstick comment, then Obama would never have said what he did.

FPd4yk0x-eg

Biden also made a lipstick reference while campaigning “zero experience in national government, zero experience in foreign affairs. There's no way you can dress up that record, even with a lot of lipstick.” Zeus Obama is now pointing at a time when McCain referred to Evita using the same phrase while talking about her health care proposals “I think they put some lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig,” But BO can spin it all he wants to and claim he was talking about their policies ;his comments would not have worked had Palin not called herself a pitbull with lipstick.

Hello:

Yeah, politics is an ugly game. Maybe McCain shouldn't have accused Obama of wanting to lose a war.

excon

How low and pathetic. That's pretty been the republican campaign to date. It's time to fight back.

So much for that transcending politics then... I figure he just lost another 1million women votes with that line .

At Republican rallies they have been chanting "read my lipstick " so he knew how it would be received . The crowd he was addressing knew also ;thus their almost uncontrollable whooping it up when he said it. This reminds me of when Michael Steele was running and Dems in the audience threw Oreo cookies at him.

That's pretty been the republican campaign to date. It's time to fight back.

??

Show us something that's anywhere near calling the opponent a pig.

He did not call anyone a pig.

Despite the play this is getting in the media, the expression about putting lipstick on a pig is not new and has been used before by politicians, one specific instance brought up by the Obama campaign is when John McCain used the expression when speaking about Hillary Clinton's health care plan (http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/10/mccain_rolls_out_health_plan_a.html).

Have you never heard the expression as it relates to an idea? Where was your outrage when McCain said it?

I guess it is OK when talking about women. Had McCain said "calling a spade a spade " I'm sure he would be given a pass.

Michelle Obama also dissed Palin:


“What you learn about Barack from his choice is that he’s not afraid of smart people (http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/08/michelle-obama-on-vp-what-you-learn-about-barack-from-his-choice-is-that-he%E2%80%99s-not-afraid-of-smart-people/).”

That's OK, though, they'll continue to pay the price (http://www.nypost.com/seven/09092008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/how_obama_blew_it_128132.htm).

That's pretty been the republican campaign to date. It's time to fight back.

That’s pathetic, NK. I get all the DNC emails so I know what they’re saying, starting with claiming McCain was “breaking the law” over campaign financing. Haven’t heard anything about the complaint they filed with the FEC have you? Here’s a sample of what they’ve been sending out:


Steve --


It's like 1989 all over again –John McCain has been caught in yet another ethics scandal.

If you had a TV on yesterday, you saw who jumped to his defense -- the team of lobbyists who work for him, led by campaign manager and lobbyist Rick Davis, and the well-oiled right-wing noise machine, led by Rush Limbaugh. In an ironic message to McCain supporters yesterday, lobbyist Davis wrote...

[John McCain] has led the charge to limit the money and influence of the special interests in politics and stomp out corruption.

They spent the day breathlessly assailing the New York Times as "liberal," ignoring the ethics lapses the team of reporters had uncovered. The fact is, John McCain is facing legitimate questions about lobbyists, favors, and campaign contributions, just as he did during the Keating Five scandal that nearly derailed his political career twenty years ago.

Seeing more dollar signs, the McCain campaign and the RNC decided to jump at the chance to take advantage of the distraction they had created to raise money. They had spent the day firing their supporters up, trying desperately to change the subject, and then they literally cashed in on it. It was textbook sleaze.

So, let's hit back.

Don't let John McCain's team of lobbyists, Rush Limbaugh and the right-wing noise machine, the RNC and their special-interest backers take advantage of John McCain's most recent ethics scandal -- it's disgusting, and we can't let them get ahead like this. They're screaming as loud as they can, and you can send a message right back:

The Dems and their leftist supporters have done nothing but attack McCain, and they’ve gone beyond disgusting in attacking Sarah Palin. Or have you not been paying attention (and joining in on the bashing)?

It was wrong to say it, there is no getting around it.
Also if I can add... both parties bash each other... I sincerely wish they wouldn't. They can prove each other wrong without crude humor, right?

Steve ;what specifically are they accusing McCain of in that rant ?

It was wrong to say it, there is no getting around it.
Also if I can add.....both parties bash each other......I sincerely wish they wouldn't. They can prove each other wrong without crude humor, right?That seems to be the american way: screw the other guy if I can get ahead.

Steve ;what specifically are they accusing McCain of in that rant ?

Tom, this was back when they were going ballistic over him allegedly using federal campaign funds to back a loan. In particular they were complaining McCain was "turning an ethics scandal into a fundraising opportunity." I was just showing NK the Dems have been on the attack all along.

Oh OK I thought it may be something new . But dredging up that old and tired Keating 5 may be all they have.

Here is a pix displayed on the Dem's official web site byone of their bloggers from Aug.30 with the header :McCain's Selection of Palin is Lipstick on a Pig

The Democratic Party | PartyBuilder | Elizabeth Berry's Blog: McCain's Selection of Palin is Lipstick on a Pig (http://www.democrats.org/page/community/post/elizabethberry/Cgsq)

http://www.innovatingtowin.com/innovating_to_win/images/pig-lipstick.jpg

He did not call anyone a pig.

Despite the play this is getting in the media, the expression about putting lipstick on a pig is not new and has been used before by politicians, one specific instance brought up by the Obama campaign is when John McCain used the expression when speaking about Hillary Clinton’s health care plan (http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/10/mccain_rolls_out_health_plan_a.html).

Have you never heard the expression as it relates to an idea? Where was your outrage when McCain said it?

Not the same at all. No one with half a brain could say that McCain was speaking about Clinton...

It's not a stretch at all to presume that Obama was insulting Palin. And it's big news today that many considered it an insult.

No one accused McCain of insulting anyone when he used the phrase because he was not insulting anyone.

It's obvious Obama is talking about the lack of 'change' in the McCain camp. Where you add the Palin connection I don't know.
You see what you want to see. It's just like religion.

Obama is correct. The whole Pub campaign has been nothing but a pig with lipstick show attempting to camouflage the past eight years. Dyed-in-the-wool Republicans, the ones that voted for Dubya twice and now want to back McCain, suddenly have short memory. It was in the 2000 Pub primaries that George W Bush went full force onslaught of nastiness against John "love child" McCain.

A little trip down memory lane...

THE 2000 CAMPAIGN: WAR OF WORDS; Spotlight Turns on Ugly Side of Politicking - New York Times (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A0DE6DD113EF932A25751C0A9669C8B 63)

Salon.com Politics | Getting ugly (http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2000/11/14/sc_pols/index.html)

Today he clarified with another animal cliché and said the comment was " Catnip for the media " implying that the press was out to get him lol.

He said that McCain "seize an innocent remark and take it out of context" .
This is a guy who has used other's comments out of context since the campaign began. (“100 years in Iraq” ....“rich is $5,000,000″) but now takes issue when it is used on him.He wants to stick to real issues like how many houses McCain owns.

For all of you who mock McCain as old and ill and as having lost his mind...

‘Stand Up For Chuck’: Biden Makes a Save After Asking State Senator in Wheelchair to Stand (http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=170853)

Where you add the Palin connection I don't know.

?

You don't know? Really? You don't know about Palin's lipstick comment?

Here you go:

Sq7kBcA5q1w

She just said it last week.

Where are the complaints that McCain was insulting anyone? There are none.

Why is Obama's statement the ONLY news today? Because he said it to insult Palin.

Smart Obama supporters are recognizing how stupid his comment was.

Holy crap are you ever making a reach to make a link.

Whatever, NK. Try this then since you're so upset withn the GOP attack machine. NY Gov. David Paterson is basically calling Republicans racists (http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/09/synonyms-for-community-organizer/):


“I think the Republican Party is too smart to call Barack Obama ‘black’ in a sense that it would be a negative. But you can take something about his life, which I noticed they did at the Republican Convention – a ‘community organizer.’ They kept saying it, they kept laughing,” he said.

Here's my take.

1) IF it was an intentional insult, it was a pretty stupid thing to do. Middle America will not respond well to Obama insulting Palin.

2) If it was not intentional, he should have apologized for any misunderstanding he may have caused, and stated that he didn't mean it as an insult, but rather her was just repeating an old political cliché. Instead of doing that in his statement this morning, he went on the attack, which just fuels the flames all the more. Another bad political move that Middle America will not respond well to.

3) I personally think it WAS an intentional insult. Obama followed up the lipstick on a pig statement with a comment about "old fish" being wrapped in new paper... a clear reference to McCain as an "Old timer" in the senate. Given these two OBVIOUS references, along with BIDEN'S remarks about lipstick, it seems clear to me that the insults were intentional. Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action.

Palin's response ought to be something along the lines of "Senator Obama is right. You can't dress up a 'community organizer' with lipstick and have it look like real experience."

Lipstick! Schmipstick! Political dipsticks! I would hope that once a few of the board Pubs here can get passed their biases they'll eventually recognize they've championed an illogical silly argument.

Palin remarked that the only difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull was lipstick. So is that to suggest all hockey moms are pit bulls with lipstick? Think about that. According to Sarah Palin, all hockey moms are dogs. Now Obama, on the other hand compared the Republican campaign to a pig with lipstick for their laughable ploy to promote themselves as change.

Holy crap are you ever making a reach to make a link.
Karma, even Obama's people see the connection. They are afraid of that connection, and how it is perceived by the people at large. THat is why they are scrambling so hard to claim that there was no intentional insult, the entire thing is a farce, and there is no connection.

If there were really no connection, their response would be to either ignore the accusations or to apologize for the misinterpretation. They can't do either of those two things because there is a connection, it's an obvious connection, and they now have to scramble for damage control.

Besides, to a certain degree, it doesn't really matter whether there was an intentional insult or not. All that matters is how the American people see it, and based on what I have been hearing and seeing in the news, Americans perceive that there IS a connection and that it was an underhanded insult by Obama and Biden. ANd based on the laughter and cheers by the audience at Obama's speech, THEY certainly made the connection.

It's all about perception, baby. And right now perception is in McCain and Palin's favor.

Elliot

... because there is a connection, it's an obvious connection, No it's not, it's manufactured and hyped

Bamram has a point - will Palin apoligize to all the hockey moms?

It wasn't just the audience laughter that makes the connection (though that's what makes Obama look bad), it was that they chanted "No pit bull! No pit bull! No pit bull! (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/09/ohio_crowd_says_no_pit_bull.html)." Even the ultra-liberal Washington Post sees that connection, so give it up, you can't spin you're way out of this.

Bamram has a point - will Palin apoligize to all the hockey moms?
For calling them pit bulls?

I hope not. Hockey Moms LIKE being known for their feistiness.

You know who first made the joke that Palin told about hockey moms and pit bulls?

A hockey mom.

That hockey mom line has resounded and resonated with the American people more than any single line in this election cycle. The people LIKE it. ESPECIALLY the hockey moms.

Obama's line has also resounded and resonated with the people... but I'm not so sure that they are too happy with it.

But if you think that Obama has nothing to apologize for, good. Go with that. We'll know the truth in November. Personally, I'm hoping Obama sticks to his guns on this. It'll do wonders for his public image.

Oh, and Palin wasn't saying that hockey moms are pit bulls without lipstick. She was saying that they are pit bulls WITH lip stick. And after saying it, McCain and Palin took a 20% lead among American women. So you tell me if there's anything to apologize for.

Elliot

Elliot, The Messiah (or is it the Virgin Mary) is perfect so he has nothing to apologize for. Obama is just doing the Lord's work (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/nyregion/08wright.html?ref=nyregion) according to his mentor Jeremiah Wright.


"Lord told him, an ordinary black boy, ‘You can be a state senator and you can bring folk to the bargaining table who not only do not talk to one another, these folk don’t like one another.’

"He did what the Lord said," Mr. Wright continued, "an ordinary black boy like Mary was an ordinary little girl."

Just a note before the Pubs messiah rhetoric begins: no matter what idioms are being bantered about today, I would not suggest going up to "hockey mom" and calling her a dog. There's a very good chance that "hockey dad" will become highly irritated.

Politics, Political News, Campaign 2008 - Politico.com (http://www.politico.com)

"the same analogy that Senator McCain himself used about Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's health care plan just last year. This phony lecture on gender sensitivity is the height of cynicism and lays bare the increasingly dishonorable campaign John McCain has chosen to run."

Elliot, The Messiah (or is it the Virgin Mary)Hint: there is no messiah and there is no virgin mary. Keep your discussions to reality not fantasy.

Hint: there is no messiah and there is no virgin mary. Keep your discussions to reality not fantasy.

Maybe this will help. Pot calling the kettle black (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pot_calling_the_kettle_black)

Just a note before the Pubs messiah rhetoric begins: no matter what idioms are being bantered about today, I would not suggest going up to "hockey mom" and calling her a dog. There's a very good chance that "hockey dad" will become highly irritated.

You mean like Obama (http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Vote2008/story?id=4881883)? I can't fault any man for defending his wife, Bobby.

Well the republican are trying so hard to play the race card, to the point obama has to be very choosy on what he says. He is fighting for the presidency position in no way was his remark offensive or discrimintive. GO OBAMA

Well the republican are trying so hard to play the race card, to the point obama has to be very choosy on what he says. He is fighting for the presidency postion in no way was his remark offensive or discrimintive. GO OBAMA

Are you acquainted with his connections to the Syrian bankroller, the Weathermen underground terrorists, and the Rev. Wright?

Nope, are you..

Nope, are you.......?

That figures!

Wow!

With unemployment, healthcare issues, energy issues, OIF, OEF, the gov bailing out corporations etc...

And this gets public play?

You mean like Obama (http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Vote2008/story?id=4881883)? I can't fault any man for defending his wife, Bobby.

Then you better not call "hockey mom" a dog, as Palin suggested. By the way when did Obama's daughters start playing hockey??

wow!

with unemployment, healthcare issues, energy issues, OIF, OEF, the gov bailing out corporations etc....

and this gets public play??It's all they have. Good point.

Are you acquainted with his connections to the Syrian bankroller, the Weathermen underground terrorists, and the Rev. Wright?



Galv, there is no fat man with a beard that slides down your chimney in late December, nor a little winged Tinkerbell that puts money under you pillow every time you lose a tooth. By the way Hawaii is part of the U.S..


It's all they have. Good point.

McCain/Palin are running a desperate circus campaign. All the issues that should be relevant to American lives are pushed aside by these clowns. I'm embarrassed for the Republican party, and as an American knowing the world is watching this campaign. It's an insult to our public intelligence. McCain's tactics are simple: dumb down the election. I am so glad to have other options of residency available to me if that dolt was to be elected. At least my vacations out of the States will be well worth the price even with the high fuel surcharges.

Hint: there is no messiah and there is no virgin mary. Keep your discussions to reality not fantasy.

Well, if we were sticking to reality, Obama wouldn't be the Democratic nominee. This is politics, not reality.

In a world where reality reigned, people would take a look at a guy like Obama and say "Who is this guy. He's got no experience, he can't take a stance on an issue, and he hangs out with terrorists and bigots. And you want to nominate him for what....?"

That is, if we were dealing with reality.

Elliot

Well the republican are trying so hard to play the race card, to the point obama has to be very choosy on what he says. He is fighting for the presidency postion in no way was his remark offensive or discrimintive. GO OBAMA

Race card? Huh?

The only guy to bring up Obama's race in this campaign is Obama. He used the race card against Hillary, and he's been trying to use it against anyone else who has anything bad to say about him. HE was the one who brought up the fact that he's black back and has a funny middle name in January. Nobody else brought up the issue of race besides Obama.

And don't you think that anyone who wants to be President of the USA SHOULD be choosy about what he says? The fact that he hasn't been choosy until now just makes his ability to be President all the more questionable.

Elliot

Nope, are you.......?

Perhaps you should make yourself acquainted with them.

First of all, there's Bill Ayers, the Weathermen terrorist, who personally set bombs at the Haymarket Statue and participated in the Days of Rage Riot in Chicago. He also led the Weathermen to bomb the Capitol Building and several police stations. Ayers said on September 11, 2001 (the day of the 9/11 Attacks) that his only regret was that he didn't do MORE bombing. Obama served with him on the two board positions, and Ayers held a fundraiser for Obama at Ayers' home in 1996. Obama has called Ayers his "good friend", and continues to defend his ongoing relationship with Ayers.

Then there's Jeremiah Wright, the radical former Pastor of the Trinity United Church of Christ, who made (and continues to make) speeches in which he refers to the USA as the "US of KKK" and says "Not God Bless America, God DAMN America" (not once, but TWICE), and talks about blacks overthrowing whites in America. Obama referred to Write as his family pastor and friend for 20 years, but claims he didn't know about Wright's radical leanings. At least that's what he claimed until April of this year, when he threw Wright under the bus in order to further his political ambitions.

How about Tony Rezko, the campaign fundraiser who has been indicted for kickbacks, bribery and illegal money deals. Rezko raised lot's of money for Obama. They also bought adjascent property from the same real estate broker on the same day, where Obama paid $300,000 under the asking price for the property. Later Rezko sold part of his land to Obama. At the time of the land deal, Rezko was already under indictment, and Obama knew that. Obama defends his friendship with Rezko, but said that the land deal was "a boneheaded mistake". Also, though Obama is NOT involved in the Rezko indictment, at least $10,000 of illegal moneys from Rezko made its way into Obama's coffers. Obama's campaign donated that amount to charity in order to divest itself of the illegal moneys.

Then there's the question of who has endorsed Obama. He's been endorsed by Hamas (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61631). In mid-April, Hamas adviser Ahmed Yousef told WorldNetDaily that “We like Mr. Obama, and we hope that he will win the elections. “I hope Mr. Obama and the Democrats will change the political discourse,” he said. “I do believe [Obama] is like John Kennedy, a great man with a great principle.” He's also been endorsed by Louise Farakhan. Castro said he would like to see an Obama Hillary ticket. The leader of the New Black Panthers is a blogger for Obama's campaign. Kim Jong Il, dictator of N. Korea has said that he supports Obama over McCain. And Students for a Democratic Underground (the predecessor of the Weathermen) also endorses Obama, though Obama has rejected SDS's endorsement.

These are Obama's friends and supporters, Donald. Don't you think you should get to know your candidate before you support him?

This is so funny. It gets sillier by the day. The children in the school ground are going at it hammer and tongs on this thread. Hahaha.
All this from the world's superpower. Petty arguments about who called who what name. This world is in more trouble than I ever imagined.
Your all acting like little brats! :)
Oops, sorry. We shouldn't call each other names.
Hahahahaha!

I'm embarrassed for the Republican party, and as an American knowing the world is watching this campaign.

The world has gotten caught up in the messiah complex also. Just check out this commentary by Jonathen Freedland of the Guardian entitled The world's verdict will be harsh if the US rejects the man it yearns forJonathan Freedland: The world's verdict will be harsh if the US rejects the man it yearns for | Comment is free | The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/10/uselections2008.barackobama?gusrc=rss&feed=fromtheguardian)

If Americans choose McCain, they will be turning their back on the rest of the world, choosing to show us four more years of the Bush-Cheney finger. And I predict a deeply unpleasant shift. Until now, anti-Americanism has been exaggerated and much misunderstood: outside a leftist hardcore, it has mostly been anti-Bushism, opposition to this specific administration. But if McCain wins in November, that might well change. Suddenly Europeans and others will conclude that their dispute is with not only one ruling clique, but Americans themselves. For it will have been the American people, not the politicians, who will have passed up a once-in-a-generation chance for a fresh start - a fresh start the world is yearning for.

If Americans reject Obama, they will be sending the clearest possible message to the rest of us - and, make no mistake, we shall hear it.


If that isn't worth a gag and a coughing up of a fur ball I don't know what is!! What he means of course is that if we don't vote for Bambi that we will have passed up on a golden opportunity to become more like Europe. We will have passed on our chance to become members of the transnational progressive movement.
Transnational progressivism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnational_progressivism)

We in America should vote for Zeus Obama because the world yearns for him. I got an idea... let him move to Europe and run for office there .Perhaps they can erect a statue of him in Berlin next to the Victory Column.

Tom captured my feelings toward Freedland's thoughts...

I love Biden, did you catch his remark yesterday that Hillary was more qualified than he was?


Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be Vice President of the United States of America. Let’s get that straight. She’s a truly close personal friend; she is qualified to be President of the United States of America. She’s easily qualified to be Vice President of the United States of America and quite frankly it might have been a better pick than me, but she is first-rate.

Good to know that Biden thinks "the most important decision that I (Obama) will make before I am president" was not necessarily the right choice.

If that aint worth a gag and a coughing up of a fur ball I don't know what is !!! What he means of course is that if we don't vote for Bambi that we will have passed up on a golden opportunity to become more like Europe. We will have passed on our chance to become members of the transnational progressive movement.
Transnational progressivism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnational_progressivism)


Not quite. What it means is that you will miss a perfect opportunity to elect a President that the rest of the world will admire, support and respect. At the moment you haven't had that for at least 8 years. Possibly longer.
But hey, this is the US elections and you don't have to please the rest of the world (I mean that too - not being sarcastic).
I think John McCain seem like a truly good man. A hero no doubt. But I also see him as being much the same as Bush. A man that whether you like it or not and rightly or wrongly is pretty well despised right around the world. I think you'll find people don't want to despise the president of the USA. They want to admire him and look to you guys for inspiration and leadership we can TRUST. The current dufus just doesn't do it. And neither will McCain I'm afraid.

I love Biden, did you catch his remark yesterday that Hillary was more qualified than he was?



Good to know that Biden thinks "the most important decision that I (Obama) will make before I am president" was not necessarily the right choice.

At least he's honest.

In Palin's recent interview she admitted her experiences of the outside world are limited to Canada, Mexico and Kuwait. In the next breath she said she was ready to be President of the USA. C'mon, if she is as smart as you guys want to admit then surely she can't really believe that?? Then again she did say at her old church that "Our national leaders are sending US soldiers on a task that is from God". So she is partial to believing such nonsense.

EDIT:
Found this link just after posting. Four to one the world wants Obama over McCain. Guess its lucky for a lot of you guys that we don't get a vote.

Either president may disappoint us - Opinion - smh.com.au (http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/either-president-may-disappoint-us/2008/09/11/1220857737358.html)

We in America should vote for Zeus Obama because the world yearns for him. I got an idea.....let him move to Europe and run for office there .Perhaps they can erect a statue of him in Berlin next to the Victory Column.


Tom, who are you trying to fool? If you could... you'd walk on water to the voting booth just to pull the lever for the newest crowned Republican Jesus, "McCain."

How low and pathetic.

I can guess in advance that he will say that he was not referring to Palin.
Ok, youse guys who don't harken from Illinoise. Here is what Obama meant:

The pig is all the Republicans' failed policies (i.e. Bush-McCain, if you want to give the pig a name); the lipstick is Palin. So, even if the Republicans dress up their failed policies with a babe like Palin, they still are only putting "lipstick" on a "pig."

Do you understand now? (P.S. It had nothing to do with the pit bull wearing lipstick--different animal, different analogy--but same lipstick.)

Perhaps you should make yourself acquainted with them.

First of all, there's Bill Ayers, the Weathermen terrorist, who personally set bombs at the Haymarket Statue and participated in the Days of Rage Riot in Chicago. He also led the Weathermen to bomb the Capitol Building and several police stations. Ayers said on September 11, 2001 (the day of the 9/11 Attacks) that his only regret was that he didn't do MORE bombing. Obama served with him on the two board positions, and Ayers held a fundraiser for Obama at Ayers' home in 1996. Obama has called Ayers his "good friend", and continues to defend his ongoing relationship with Ayers.

Then there's Jeremiah Wright, the radical former Pastor of the Trinity United Church of Christ, who made (and continues to make) speeches in which he refers to the USA as the "US of KKK" and says "Not God Bless America, God DAMN America" (not once, but TWICE), and talks about blacks overthrowing whites in America. Obama referred to Write as his family pastor and friend for 20 years, but claims he didn't know about Wright's radical leanings. At least that's what he claimed until April of this year, when he threw Wright under the bus in order to further his political ambitions.

How about Tony Rezko, the campaign fundraiser who has been indicted for kickbacks, bribery and illegal money deals. Rezko raised lot's of money for Obama. They also bought adjascent property from the same real estate broker on the same day, where Obama paid $300,000 under the asking price for the property. Later Rezko sold part of his land to Obama. At the time of the land deal, Rezko was already under indictment, and Obama knew that. Obama defends his friendship with Rezko, but said that the land deal was "a boneheaded mistake". Also, though Obama is NOT involved in the Rezko indictment, at least $10,000 of illegal moneys from Rezko made its way into Obama's coffers. Obama's campaign donated that amount to charity in order to divest itself of the illegal moneys.

Then there's the question of who has endorsed Obama. He's been endorsed by Hamas (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61631). In mid-April, Hamas adviser Ahmed Yousef told WorldNetDaily that “We like Mr. Obama, and we hope that he will win the elections. “I hope Mr. Obama and the Democrats will change the political discourse,” he said. “I do believe [Obama] is like John Kennedy, a great man with a great principle.” He's also been endorsed by Louise Farakhan. Castro said he would like to see an Obama Hillary ticket. The leader of the New Black Panthers is a blogger for Obama's campaign. Kim Jong Il, dictator of N. Korea has said that he supports Obama over McCain. And Students for a Democratic Underground (the predecessor of the Weathermen) also endorses Obama, though Obama has rejected SDS's endorsement.

These are Obama's friends and supporters, Donald. Don't you think you should get to know your candidate before you support him?


I have been reading these threads for weeks and rarely say anything but... I am wondering why no one is commenting on this post.
Would it be wise to vote for a man that has questionable friends and ties. Who believes the old phrase "birds of the feathers, flock together", or am I just being paranoid?

I have been reading these threads for weeks and rarely say anything but... I am wondering why no one is commenting on this post.
Would it be wise to vote for a man that has questionable friends and ties. Who believes the old phrase "birds of the feathers, flock together", or am I just being paranoid?


Because it was addressed in the forum over two months ago, and before that, time and time again. It's old propaganda playing the six degrees separation game. I'm off to work. Everybody have a good day, good weekend, and good shabbos.

At least he's honest.

In Palin's recent interview she admitted her experiences of the outside world are limited to Canada, Mexico and Kuwait. In the next breath she said she was ready to be President of the USA. C'mon, if she is as smart as you guys want to admit then surely she can't really believe that??? Then again she did say at her old church that "Our national leaders are sending US soldiers on a task that is from God". So she is partial to believing such nonsense.

If you caught the interview or read the transcript you should know "the task from God" quote was badly distorted. She didn't claim it was, but as Abraham Lincoln suggested prayed that it was a task from God, as in let us pray that we're on God's side, not that God is on our side. There is a huge difference there.

I am wondering why no one is commenting on this post.
Would it be wise to vote for a man that has questionable friends and ties. Who believes the old phrase "birds of the feathers, flock together", or am I just being paranoid?Hello bushq:

Bill Ayres was a terrorist 40 years ago. He got caught. He did his time. He's not a terrorist today. Today, he is Distinguished Professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

Mayor Daily consults with him regularly. Do you think the mayor is a terrorist?

There were things I did 40 years ago - but I don't do them now. You associate with me. Does that mean that we're birds of the feather?

excon

I was not aware of Ayers serving any time. I thought charges were dropped due to a technicality and only then did he come in from the underground. So he served no time for his terrorist bombings.Bernardine Dohrn did ,but he didn't .

''I don't regret setting bombs'' ''I feel we didn't do enough.''... Even today, he finds ''a certain eloquence to bombs, a poetry and a pattern from a safe distance,'' he writes... So, would Mr. Ayers do it all again, he is asked? ''I don't want to discount the possibility,'' he said.
No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen - New York Times

The Ayers issue is unresolved although debated here Bobby. It became relevant again over the Annenberg Project's records that were first withheld and then released after scrubbing .

.

By the way : does Ayers realize that he has become the same greedy corrupt elitist pig he used to try to take out with bombs ?

btw : does Ayers realize that he has become the same greedy corrupt elitist pig he used to try to take out with bombs ?Who cares?

Who cares?

I get it, hypocrisy and sleaze only count if it comes from the right. Is that it, NK?

I get it, hypocrisy and sleaze only count if it comes from the right. Is that it, NK?No, I don't care what McCain's friends did decades ago either, it's not relevant.

Bill Ayres was a terrorist 40 years ago.
Ol' Bill grew up in the Chicago suburb just west of me. He and I could have had pizza together had we known each other back when we were kids.

He didn't get caught, but did turn himself in.

These are his comments regarding terrorist, printed in Wikipedia --

"We weren't terrorists," Ayers told an interviewer for the Chicago Tribune in 2001. "The reason we weren't terrorists is because we did not commit random acts of terror against people. Terrorism was what was being practiced in the countryside of Vietnam by the United States." In a letter to the editor in the Chicago Tribune, Ayers wrote, "I condemn all forms of terrorism — individual, group and official". He also condemned the September 11 terrorist attacks in that letter. "Today we are witnessing crimes against humanity on our own shores on an unthinkable scale, and I fear that we may soon see more innocent people in other parts of the world dying in response."

Nice distintion .He was waging war on America then as he bomber the NYC Police HQ .

Here is another of his warped definitions explaining why he was not a terrorist :
"Terrorists destroy randomly,"..."while our actions bore ... the precise stamp of a cut diamond. Terrorists intimidate, while we aimed only to educate."

His girl friend died making a nail bomb that would've been detonated at a dance where both soldiers and civilians were to attend . Hundreds of lives could have been lost had the plan been successfully executed. Ayers attested that the bomb would have done serious damage, "tearing through windows and walls and, yes, people too.
"http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2169

EDIT:
Found this link just after posting. Four to one the world wants Obama over McCain. Guess its lucky for a lot of you guys that we dont get a vote.

Either president may disappoint us - Opinion - smh.com.au (http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/either-president-may-disappoint-us/2008/09/11/1220857737358.html)

Yeah... but who does that include?

It includes Hamas, Hizbolah, Al Qaeda, the PLO, the Taliban, FARC and all the other terrorists. It includes Castro, Chavez, Kim Gong Il, the Chinese leadership and Ahmadinejad.

We should not be basing our presidential choices on what outsiders, including our enemies, would like to see. If our enemies want Obama, it seems pretty clear to me that Obama is the LAST person we should vote for.

Elliot

Ol' Bill grew up in the Chicago suburb just west of me. He and I coulda had pizza together had we known each other back when we were kids.

He didn't get caught, but did turn himself in.

These are his comments regarding terrorist, printed in Wikipedia --

"We weren't terrorists," Ayers told an interviewer for the Chicago Tribune in 2001. "The reason we weren't terrorists is because we did not commit random acts of terror against people. Terrorism was what was being practiced in the countryside of Vietnam by the United States." In a letter to the editor in the Chicago Tribune, Ayers wrote, "I condemn all forms of terrorism — individual, group and official". He also condemned the September 11 terrorist attacks in that letter. "Today we are witnessing crimes against humanity on our own shores on an unthinkable scale, and I fear that we may soon see more innocent people in other parts of the world dying in response."

I don't know... blowing up statues in public parks, blowing up police stations, blowing up military recruiting offices, and blowing up the capitol... aren't these acts of terrorism?

Ayers claims his actions were designed to "educate"?

He was a friggin' university professor. That's his idea of education? What was his curriculum? Plastique 101? How to make home-made pipe bobs? Civil disobedience and violent protest for the 20th Century?

Education TEACHES people. Blowing stuff up KILLS people. Ayers was no educator, regardless of what he calls himself.

Worse, he sympathizes with terrorists, and counts himself as one of them. After the Towers came down on 9-11, Ayers said that the only thing he regretted was that he didn't blow MORE stuff up like the 9-11 terrorists did. HE CONSIDERS HIMSELF ONE OF THEM.

Please don't be so naïve, Carol. Ayers is a sick and dangerous man, and a terrorist. He's NOT in the league of an OBL, but only because he incompetent, not for lack of trying. And he's PROUD to be counted among their number.

Elliot

No, I don't care what McCain's friends did decades ago either, it's not relevant.

Actually, it is very relevant. Who a person associates with is indicative of who he takes advice from.

ANd it's hard to question McCains friends... they were all spending their time in the Hanoi Hilton getting the crap kicked out of them by communist enemies of the USA, while Ayers was blowing stuff up back home in sympathy for the guys who were torturing McCain and his buddies.

Associations go DIRECTLY to indicate what a person believes, supports, and takes comfort in. And Obama's associations are DANGEROUS indicators that he is the WRONG MAN FOR THE JOB.

Elliot

Yeah... but who does that include?

It includes Hamas, Hizbolah, Al Qaeda, the PLO, the Taliban, FARC and all the other terrorists. It includes Castro, Chavez, Kim Gong Il, the Chinese leadership and Ahmadinejad.

We should not be basing our presidential choices on what outsiders, including our enemies, would like to see. If our enemies want Obama, it seems pretty clear to me that Obama is the LAST person we should vote for.

Elliot


If the world is so in love with him , they can have him :D

He was a friggin' university professor. That's his idea of education? What was his curriculum? Plastique 101? How to make home-made pipe bobs? Civil disobedience and violent protest for the 20th Century?

Education TEACHES people. Blowing stuff up KILLS people. Ayers was no educator, regardless of what he calls himself.

Worse, he sympathizes with terrorists, and counts himself as one of them. After the Towers came down on 9-11, Ayers said that the only thing he regretted was that he didn't blow MORE stuff up like the 9-11 terrorists did. HE CONSIDERS HIMSELF ONE OF THEM.

Please don't be so naive, Carol. Ayers is a sick and dangerous man, and a terrorist. He's NOT in the league of an OBL, but only because he incompetent, not for lack of trying. And he's PROUD to be counted among their number.

Elliot

IS, Elliiot, IS. Ayers IS a college teacher NOW. He teaches classes in social justice, urban educational reform, narrative and interpretive research, dealing with children in trouble with the law, etc.

Here is a site that lists the books he has written:

William Ayers: Books by William Ayers (http://www.bestwebbuys.com/William_Ayers-mcid_2356839.html?isrc=b-authorsearch)

Ayers is not "a sick and dangerous man," as you so glowingly phrased it. He is not proud of his past (40 years ago!! ) which occasionally comes back to bite him in the butt, as pasts so often do.

Naïve, Elliot? Who's naïve? I at least do research on both sides of an issue and read what I have found and weigh the information therein and do my level best not to swallow hook, line, and sinker whatever the party line is.

P.S. And I would be very pleased to eat pizza with Bill Ayers today if I had the chance, Elliot, just as I would be pleased to share one with you.

Here's his blog. Feel free to read it and post a comment:

Bill Ayers Blogspot (http://billayers.org/)

Ayers is not "a sick and dangerous man," as you so glowingly phrased it. He is not proud of his past (40 years ago!!!!!!) which occasionally comes back to bite him in the butt, as pasts so often do.


Carol, you are being naïve.

Please read this article from the NY Times of 9/11/01 (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F02E1DE1438F932A2575AC0A9679C8B 63).

Here are a few quotes from that article.

''I don't regret setting bombs,'' Bill Ayers said. ''I feel we didn't do enough.''

In his book Mr. Ayers describes the Weathermen descending into a ''whirlpool of violence.'' ''Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon,'' he writes. But then comes a disclaimer: ''Even though I didn't actually bomb the Pentagon -- we bombed it, in the sense that Weathermen organized it and claimed it.'' He goes on to provide details about the manufacture of the bomb and how a woman he calls Anna placed the bomb in a restroom. No one was killed or injured, though damage was extensive.

So, would Mr. Ayers do it all again, he is asked? ''I don't want to discount the possibility,'' he said.

Even today, he finds ''a certain eloquence to bombs, a poetry and a pattern from a safe distance,'' he writes.



This does not sound like a man who is not proud of his past. It, in fact, sounds like a man who is quite proud of his past and wants to in some way recapture the "glory" of his past. It sounds like a man who wishes to continue in the actions of the past. It sounds like someone who CELEBRATES his past.

Bill Ayers is an unrepentant terrorist, a lover of bombs at "a safe distance", and a hater of America.

Ayers' politics haven't changed. Nor have his methods. He is still hell-bent on destroying American capitalism, democracy and "imperialism".

Why you would want to have a pizza with such a person, I have no idea.

Elliot

Why you would want to have a pizza with such a person, I have no idea.
I'll give him all my anchovies.

John Batchelor does a nice job writing about Bill Ayers . He claims Ayers is part of a group that also includes another blast from the past;Tom Hayden who are feverishly determined to run interference for Obama over his relationship with Ayers during the Annenberg Challenge Project days .
Obama's Plumbers - HUMAN EVENTS (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28508)

BTW There is a community organizer named Curtis Sliwa .I can point to tangible accomplishments he has done that will positively affect the communities in a large number of cities around the country and the world long after he is gone.
The Alliance of Guardian Angels (http://www.guardianangels.org/)

I find ;no matter how hard I search ,no accomplishment by B.O. during his time as a "Community Organizer". By his own admission he was ineffective . That is why he decided to leave the "profession" ,and pursue his law degree.

I find ;no matter how hard I search ,no accomplishment by B.O. during his time as a "Community Organizer". By his own admission he was ineffective . That is why he decided to leave the "profession" ,and persue his law degree.
I'll post his accomplishments this afternoon after I eat lunch. He wasn't effective in that he didn't magically turn things around in the neighborhood where he worked. No one is effective as a community organizer unless they spend years there, and then only so much so. How long did it take Dorothy Day or Jane Addams?? A friend has been a night minister (along with other ministers and church members) in the Chicago inner city for decades and has barely scratched the surface of helping residents, prostitutes, drug dealers. And Obama was in one of the worst possible areas of South Side Chicago, trying to bring people together.

One source, from usnews.com:

Listening. In a speech in February announcing his presidential bid, Obama said, "It was in these neighborhoods that I received the best education I ever had." His work, he added, "taught me a lot about listening to people as opposed to coming in with a predetermined agenda."

Today, the experiences at Altgeld Gardens echo throughout his campaign. His support last week for allowing Cuban-Americans to increase their contact with relatives in Cuba was an extension of his outreach to both friends and foes in Chicago. The same is true of his pledge to meet as president without preconditions with leaders of rogue nations such as Iran and North Korea. His critics called him naive, but his admirers say it was another example of Obama's commitment to seeking common ground.

After graduating from Columbia University in 1983 with a major in political science, Obama worked as a financial consultant in New York City. But he was bored—and drawn to public service. In 1985, he moved to Chicago to work with local churches organizing job training and other programs for poor and working-class residents of Altgeld Gardens, a public housing project where 5,300 African-Americans tried to survive amid shuttered steel mills, a nearby landfill, a putrid sewage treatment plant, and a pervasive feeling that the white establishment of Chicago would never give them a fair shake.

Jerry Kellman, a social activist who recruited Obama, recalls, "He was very bright, very articulate, very personable, and very idealistic," inspired by civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.'s philosophy of nonviolence. Kellman offered Obama a job at the annual salary of $10,000, and he threw in $2,000 so Obama could buy a ramshackle car to get around.

Obama was a stranger to the area but caught on quickly by showing humility and a strong work ethic. "We knew what was wrong in the community but we didn't know how to get something done about it," recalls Yvonne Lloyd, 78, who worked with Obama. Obama insisted on "staying in the background while he empowered us." By Obama's own admission, there were few big victories. But whether it was getting the city to fill potholes, provide summer jobs, or remove asbestos from the apartments or persuading the apartment managers to repair toilets, pipes, and ceilings, Obama encouraged residents to come up with their own priorities with the gentle admonition: "It's your community."

If you caught the interview or read the transcript you should know "the task from God" quote was badly distorted. She didn't claim it was, but as Abraham Lincoln suggested prayed that it was a task from God, as in let us pray that we're on God's side, not that God is on our side. There is a huge difference there.

Quotes being badly distorted?? Never... :D

Yeah... but who does that include?

It includes Hamas, Hizbolah, Al Qaeda, the PLO, the Taliban, FARC and all the other terrorists. It includes Castro, Chavez, Kim Gong Il, the Chinese leadership and Ahmadinejad.

We should not be basing our presidential choices on what outsiders, including our enemies, would like to see. If our enemies want Obama, it seems pretty clear to me that Obama is the LAST person we should vote for.

Elliot

Somehow I don't think the BBC survey included polling Osama bin Laden and his pals.

Somehow i dont think the BBC survey included polling Osama bin Laden and his pals.

They didn't have to. OBL, Ahmadinejad, Hamas, Hizbollah, Chavez and Castro have all made their pick known to the MSM.

Elliot

Jerry Kellman, a social activist who recruited Obama

Perhaps that is the difference between Obama and Sliwa . Sliwa wasn't recruited and trained by a Saul Alinsky radical like Obama was .

This is what Obama wrote about community organizing in his first autobiography
“When classmates in college asked me just what it was that a community organizer did, I couldn't answer them directly,” “Instead, I'd pronounce on the need for change. Change in the White House, where Reagan and his minions were carrying on their dirty deeds. Change in the Congress, compliant and corrupt. Change in the mood of the country, manic and self-absorbed. Change won't come from the top, I would say. Change will come from a mobilized grass roots.”

Obviously he changed because now he is seeking to be the top of the top.

Altgeld Gardens are as bad today as when Obama was "organizing "there. In his book, he pretends he had a major role in redevelopment especially in asbestos removal .Reports I've read say he had a minor role at best in that..

Altgeld Gardens are as bad today as when Obama was "organizing "there.
That's because no one has kept up the organizing. Projects were abandoned and new ones weren't instituted. That's not Obama's fault. AG is no walk in the park.

From Wiki --

"Altgeld Gardens' boundaries are 130th Street on the north and 138th Street on the south, from the Calumet Expressway on the east and the Calumet River on the west. Altgeld Gardens is located near numerous manufacturing plants, former steel mills, waste dumps and landfills. The residents have a growing concern about the number of deaths annually from cancer and other diseases that may be related to their environment."

Typical liberal solution housing the poor near a garbage dump.

Typical liberal solution housing the poor near a garbage dump.
Hello again, tom:

The typical Republican solution would be to let them live IN the garbage dump, and not notice.

excon

Typical liberal solution housing the poor near a garbage dump.
Why do you think that's liberal? Who "encouraged" the poor to gather at the foot of the levees in NO?

Who "encouraged" the poor to gather at the foot of the levees in NO?


Not sure what you are getting at. . The lower 9th ward's history goes back to 1920 around the time the Industrial canal was built. The poor originally moved there on their own ;and canals and drainage was added to better the lives of the poor of the community. . Hurricane Betsy destroyed it in 1965 . 81 lives were lost in the ward. As I recall the Dems ran everything then.

Here's some history on Altgeld Gardens (from its site):

Located in a far south neighborhood near Riverdale, Altgeld Gardens, or, "The Gardens" is historic, as it is the location of the first public housing projects in the United States and was also an important stop on the Underground Railroad. It was built in 1945 to deal with the housing needs of African-Americans returning from the Second World War. Its 1,500 two-story row houses that span 157 acres are in the midst of getting rehabbed, and are bordered by 130th street, the Calumet River, Indiana Avenue and the I94 Expressway. It was originally settled by Dutch and German immigrants in the mid 1800's.

Originally Posted by tomder55
Typical liberal solution housing the poor near a garbage dump.

If liberals did this, what would the conservative solution have been?

That's not what happened at Atgeld --

In the 1940s and 1950s, residents viewed [Chicago] public housing as a path to upward mobility. The lowest-income people and those living in the worst slums were given priority in the new projects, but they were carefully screened for substance abuse and criminal records. All had to pass a housekeeping “home visit.” The majority of households were two-parent families. Female-headed households constituted less than 30 percent. The tenants were poor, but most were employed. It was the first time many of the tenants had experienced racial integration, and they reported that racial harmony in the projects was the norm.

[CHA head Elizabeth] Wood wanted to expand integrated public housing to more areas in the city. But racial politics led a drastic revision of CHA housing policy. In 1953, the placement of a black family in the Trumbull Park Homes led to a violent uprising by white residents in the neighborhood. The incident provided an opportunity for Chicago's segregationist politicians to put an end to Wood's efforts. She was fired the following year along with many of her key staff members.

During the same time, urban renewal and highway construction projects caused the displacement of thousands of African Americans. Pressure to integrate the city's white neighborhoods was mounting. The politicians' response was containment – in the form of high-density, high-rise buildings in black neighborhoods.