Apparently, the intimidation is working...

[shagdrum]

Congratulations, Obama!: Media's Savaging of Joe the Plumber Causes Witness to Ayers-Obama Relationship to Get Cold Feet
The tip, and this is just a tip, but it's coming from someone reliable:

The problem in this story is twofold. Without wanting to provide details, the story really needs a second source.

Tom Maguire? Buddy? Please answer my emails.

The second problem is that anonymity -- no names, no pictures-- is requested. He fears retaliation and harassment. And who knows -- perhaps more.

Media may get away with going single-source on this, or anonymous sources, but not both single-source and anonymous.

So here's the day's twist: Believe it or don't.

The source was considering dropping his demand for anonymity. Thus likely moving the story forward. (Not to the Politico, by the way: the other, far more important source.)

And now, today? After witnessing Politico, among others, savage Joe Wurtzelbacher?

Cold feet.

The Politico has this story. They've had it for a while. They don't want to run it with the guy's anonymity kept intact.

Gee, I wonder why he wanted to keep that?

They're willing to endlessly vet anyone who even asks Barack Obama a question, but not Barack Obama himself.

I can pretty much understand the media's reluctance to allow anonymity -- except for the fact that the media so gleefully engages in the witness intimidation that prompts the request for anonymity in the first place.

As of now, the story appears dead.

Again, second source crucial. If anyone has the guts to go up against Obama's cultists and his state media.


The Other Party on the Story: I should say the Politico's reasoning is not obviously biased, because the other party, whom I respect, has the same damn problems.

I am picking on the Politico, however, because let's face it, they are a bit loose with the rules when it suits them, and because they took part in this "vetting," as they call it, of a citizen who dared to ask a question.

They're part of the same smear campaign and creepy threats of retaliation -- a home address? Why does that need to be known to a charged, angry electorate? -- against a guy who asked a question.

No, the Politico didn't do that part, but they dug an awful lot. And encouraged digging, because any leftie who hit upon something would get his tip published.

I cannot even imagine what would happen to a guy who called Obama a straight-up liar on his supposed "flimsy" relationship with The Terrorist William Ayers.

They know what this guy fears -- because they just participated in it.

Any dink of a sub-bureaucrat who could whistle-blow against the Bush Administration would have his story told -- with anonymity.

But it's different for The One.

 

[shagdrum]

And an interesting take from this blog:

So what have we learned from this episode?

1. Thou shalt not offend The One by asking him a question. Of any kind.
2. Anyone who questions The One will have to undergo a public pillorying of a kind unseen since the Red Scare, or perhaps the Inquisition.
3. The Tanning-Bed Media will happily participate in any inquisition, as long as it keeps them from investigating irrelevant issues like Obama’s ties to the Chicago Machine, William Ayers, ACORN, or his record on protecting infanticide.

Don’t ask questions. Don’t check the records of people running for political office, but do check the records of those who dare violate Rule #1. No dissent will be tolerated. Our political and media masters have spoken.​

 

[Calabrio]

This is an affront to Democracy.
For 8 years, we've seen people equate Bush to Hitler on the television, yet if you simply ask the messiah a pointed question, you are torn into pieces by the media by weeks end....

So, the press interviewed clearly bias sources to obtain his license info, his tax information, and if that's not enough, I'm sure we'll learn about his marital status.... I hope he never had a DUI as a teenager, if so, the Times will run it on page one.

To aid Obama, fortunately, most of the people who know things that would turn him off to the public have no reason to go public with it since they are ideologically on the same side. And if you're not in lock step, you have to be extremely brave to face the press scrutiny.

The Democrats are crossing a new line. Now, they aren't just BORKING good people seeking jobs in government, now they're destroying regular citizens who threaten them....

With this, we know that an Obama administration with Prime Minister Pelosi will enact a new fairness doctrine. Undoubtedly institute laws regarding "hate speech," a term broad enough to basically mean that independent or unpopular thought is illegal.

This is scary stuff.

The Democrats in power (now the traditional democrat voter) are actually going about doing everything they wrongfully accused Republicans of wanting to do.

 

[fossten]

Wonder what foxpaws thinks about this chilling of the First Amendment. I'm sure she'll finesse it, though.

 

[foxpaws]

oh I do - it is on the other intimidation post...

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

And an interesting take from this blog:
So what have we learned from this episode?
Thou shalt not offend The One by asking him a question. Of any kind.
Anyone who questions The One will have to undergo a public pillorying of a kind unseen since the Red Scare, or perhaps the Inquisition.
The Tanning-Bed Media will happily participate in any inquisition, as long as it keeps them from investigating irrelevant issues like Obama’s ties to the Chicago Machine, William Ayers, ACORN, or his record on protecting infanticide.
Don’t ask questions. Don’t check the records of people running for political office, but do check the records of those who dare violate Rule #1. No dissent will be tolerated. Our political and media masters have spoken.

:bsflag:

Don't act like Obama's never been scrutinized by the MSM, who has echoed the cries from the "tabloids" like Limbaugh, O'Reilley, Hannity and other kooks asking about (for example) Ayers, his birth cert, etc, etc, etc. Even after opening the Hawaiian records and the "Anneberg" boxes to show nothing was being hidden and everything is legit, Obama is STILL falsely attacked by the McCain campaign and the RWWs.

There is only two answers, double standard, and fear mongering.

They're part of the same smear campaign and creepy threats of retaliation -- a home address? Why does that need to be known to a charged, angry electorate? -- against a guy who asked a question.

So WHY haven't you chastized Brian for posting Joes home address in that other thread here on this very board?? Hypocrite?

 

[Calabrio]

:bsflag:

Don't act like Obama's never been scrutinized by the MSM, who has echoed the cries from the "tabloids" like Limbaugh, O'Reilley, Hannity and other kooks asking about (for example) Ayers, his birth cert, etc, etc, etc. Even after opening the Hawaiian records and the "Anneberg" boxes to show nothing was being hidden and everything is legit, Obama is STILL falsely attacked by the McCain campaign and the RWWs.

The actual mainstream media, the countless sources that pretend to be fair and objective, have completely AVOIDED dealing or scrutinizing anything Obama has said or done.

They have NOT asked questions about Ayers.
They have NOT asked questions about his birth certificate.
They have NOT asked pointed questions about his affiliations.

"So Obama, what about Bill Ayers??"
"Him? I barely know the guy. "
"O.K. Thanks, case closed."

This is demonstrated by the fact that Obama himself has had to change his story regarding Ayers several time since the start of the campaign. And it still flies in stark contrast to the public record regarding it. Yet the media doesn't challenge him on this. No. They're in his corner.

The media is a 5th column. There can be no doubt about that after seeing how recklessly irresponsible they have been this election cycle.

There is only two answers, double standard, and fear mongering.

You're delusional.

So WHY haven't you chastized Brian for posting Joes home address in that other thread here on this very board?? Hypocrite?

That's a stupid question and you're trying to make a cheap point.
That address is plastered all over the internet right now, along with his tax records, criminal record, license information, and a list of every residence he's lived in.
Brian doesn't get chastised because he didn't post it with the intention of intimidating the guy.

 

[foxpaws]

So, I won't go into Ayers here - I have been there, done that, elsewhere....

I believe the birth certificate thing is smoke and mirrors - but, so many people are looking into it the truth will come out, if it hasn't already - that there isn't anything to report.

Other affiliations - I am waiting to see the info on ACORN from the FBI, and to find out more on the current day connection between Obama and ACORN.

I also look at McCain's past affiliations. Both candidates have ghosts in their past. But to me it is more important to discover who do they currently associate with.

But, the other part of the equation, do you go after joe plumber?

If I am at a GOP rally and afterwards ask Sarah Palin why the McCain/Palin health care program will take over $5,000 out of my pocket every year, I expect that the media will come and find me. I would hope the media will come and find me. That was my purpose in asking the question - I wanted to make sure that my question gets answered, and gets 'airtime'.

But I certainly think that my background will be looked into. Maybe that is where I differ from Mr Plumber. I would imagine that my motives would be reviewed. Especially if the fact I was a member of the opposite party was discovered.

Joe wants his 15 minutes of fame. Soon he will have his own cable TV show, make millions, complain about his taxes, forget to pay his taxes, and fall into a pit of disgrace and reality TV shows. His son will be seen late one night with Paris Hilton outside a gay bar in Manhattan, and the next new thing will take Joe's place. All in about the space of a week.

Don't just look at the media on exploiting Joe. There is plenty of exploiting going on here. The McCain machine wants to exploit Joe and Joe wants to exploit the media. The exploitation business is very lucrative for all sides.

 

[MonsterMark]

And what are you going to do if you find out Obama:
Lied about Ayers
Lied about ACORN
Lied about his citizenship

My guess is you, like millions of others, will just ignore the revelations as an inconvenience and still vote for the Messiah.

 

[foxpaws]

oddly Bryan, for many the choice has already been made.

Mail-in ballot.

I am finding a whole lot of people have already sent theirs in, or have started early voting.

How much money will be spent these last few weeks for how few people? Is the procrastination vote all that big?

But, in case you thought I would avoid the question all together.

Ayers (the past) doesn't matter that much to me. If there is a current day connection between the two men - would it matter - not that much either. Ayers polarizes, but, in actually, he is no longer, and hasn't been for some time, the same man he was during the Vietnam War era. I allow for change.

The citizenship thing - well I don't even have to think about that - if Obama isn't a citizen, all this is moot and lets get Hillary in the White House.

ACORN does bother me - what little I know about it. It could be a deal breaker for me. If it is shown that ACORN is blatantly and knowingly breaking the law and that Obama has known about the law breaking and has condoned that action, I will have to go with Nadar.

But, the question remains - have I sent in my mail-in ballot?

 

[MonsterMark]

But, the question remains - have I sent in my mail-in ballot?

Well, I don't have many kind things to say about people that vote early so I won't say anything about them. To me, voting early is like voting with half of the information.

If I ran around making business decisions based on half the info, I'd be out of business in few months.

I hope you enjoy the throw-up taste in your mouth after you find out who the Messiah really was and is and it'll be too late to spit it out.

 

[Calabrio]

Ayers (the past) doesn't matter that much to me. If there is a current day connection between the two men - would it matter - not that much either. Ayers polarizes, but, in actually, he is no longer, and hasn't been for some time, the same man he was during the Vietnam War era. I allow for change.

The issue with Ayers isn't simply his embrace of terrorism in the early 70s. That's bad enough, but it's really the symptom of his sickness.

He STILL is the same man he was back then, he's just learned a better way to advance his agenda. This time without explosives and blood shed.

And Obama is ideologically on the same page as Ayers. The bloodshed is a physical manifestation of the kind of American-hatred that a guy like Ayers holds. Ayers took Obama under his wing because of their SHARED world view.

The citizenship thing - well I don't even have to think about that - if Obama isn't a citizen, all this is moot and lets get Hillary in the White House.

Actually, if Obama did win, it would make the gaffesmeister the President, not Hillary.

ACORN does bother me - what little I know about it. It could be a deal breaker for me. If it is shown that ACORN is blatantly and knowingly breaking the law and that Obama has known about the law breaking and has condoned that action, I will have to go with Nadar.

This was posted here last night-


When asked about ACORN at the debate on Wednesday night, Obama said this:
"The only involvement I've had with ACORN was I represented them alongside the U.S. Justice Department in making Illinois implement a motor voter law that helped people get registered at DMVs."
He made this statement completely unchallenged by the press.

YouTube - OBAMA CAUGHT SAYING ACORN AND FRIENDS WILL SHAPE HIS PRESIDENTIAL AGENDA
If you don't want to sit through the entire video, just skip to 1:26

"Before I even get inaugurated, during the transition, we will be calling all of you (ACORN) to have you shape the agenda"


...I hope you didn't vote early for a candidate who still has yet to be vetted or tested.

 

[foxpaws]

OK, I have spent the afternoon at the local hookah joint... so, as a reader warning I am a bit lightheaded, and quite muzzy Please, temper your reading of my posts....

So, people can never change? Ayers isn't the same man he was 40 years ago.

However, even that doesn't matter. The Obama/Ayers connection has never been proved to be more than some meetings on education improvement boards and one fundraiser 13 years ago. (If you need to reference the whole post - It is over at the Obama is a good guy thread).

Obama doesn't embrace the ideology of the Weathermen. Nor has he ever.

That is just silly. Show me where Obama's ideology and the Weathermen's march hand in hand. Quick - do you even know what the Weathermen stood for in the late 60s -without having to look it up on the internet? Have you made a study of protest groups of the 60s and 70s - I sincerely doubt it, since you lump all those hateful hippy radicals into one big slush fund.

I know if Obama wins that Biden is next in line - duh.... If the citizenship thing occurs before the election - Hillary would be the next in line, coming in 2nd in the Dem primaries.

And, I said I am waiting for the investigation into the ACORN/Obama connection - I am not going to be looking at speculation, that is wrong.

"Before I even get inaugurated, during the transition, we will be calling all of you (ACORN) to have you shape the agenda"

Oh, tipsy lips, you shouldn't really add parenthetical comment.

The real quote - I listened to the whole thing Calabrio...

Yes, but first, let me just say, before I even get inaugurated, during the transition, we’re going to be calling all of you in, to help shape the agenda. We’re going to be having meetings all across the country with community organizations, so that you have input into the agenda of the next Presidency of the United States of America.

He is referring to community organizations in general, not ACORN specifically - and if you hear the rest of the speech, which your right wing source chopped off, it is very apparent that the remarks refer to all types of community organizations, in fact, this was a meeting for the Heartland Democratic Presidency Forum, which ACORN is a part of, but there are many, many organizations who also belong, and were present at this national event. For instance the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico sent a group...

Look for the whole clip - find the whole story- don't accept speculation and bias on either side....

Oh, I haven't voted yet you silly people - I have 14 amendments to slog through, along with about 18 referendums...

 

[Calabrio]

So, people can never change? Ayers isn't the same man he was 40 years ago.

As I mentioned, Ayers has changed his tactics, NOT his principles.

Though he was never held accountable for his actions, he's never apologized for them. I have every reason to believe that his change in tactics came about, not because of a change of heart, because he recognized that they were far too overt and as such, ineffective...

The Obama/Ayers connection has never been proved to be more than some meetings on education improvement boards and one fundraiser 13 years ago.

Again, this is not true, but simply for the sake of discussion, let's just say that there association together has been strictly political and not resembling a mentorship. Let's not even bother discussing how Ayers helped hand picked a relative unknown like Obama to chair the Chicago Annenberg Challenge.

You have a close association between these two men, in similiar political circles, actively engaged in pursuing the same social and political goals. And recognizing that, you need to identify what the work of the Foundation.

Are you familiar with Saul Alinsky and the "Rules for Radicals?"

I am not linking Obama with violence. However, I would say that his associations with Ayers and the work they did with a common goal, demonstrates that they have a shared agenda.

Obama doesn't embrace the ideology of the Weathermen. Nor has he ever.

No, he simply does not embrace the tactics the Weather Udernground employed. It would appear that he very much embraces the actual ideology though. Mind you, as with all of the other 'anti-war' organizations, the actually military engagements are just one of the issues that they are actively involved in.

That is just silly. Show me where Obama's ideology and the Weathermen's march hand in hand. Quick - do you even know what the Weathermen stood for in the late 60s -without having to look it up on the internet? Have you made a study of protest groups of the 60s and 70s - I sincerely doubt it, since you lump all those hateful hippy radicals into one big slush fund.

Yes I do. They were a radical leftist organization. While they were against the war, they were also motivated to lead a revolution that would overthrow capitalism.

In the 60 and 70s, in their youthful zeal and ignorance, they made it a violent revolution. With age and some experience, guys like Ayers understand that there are more effective ways. The best way is to affect the change of their revolution without the public even knowing that it's happened.

And yes, I have studied terrorism in the United States pretty extensively.

He is referring to community organizations in general, not ACORN specifically - and if you hear the rest of the speech, which your right wing source chopped off, it is very apparent that the remarks refer to all types of community organizations, in fact, this was a meeting for the Heartland Democratic Presidency Forum, which ACORN is a part of, but there are many, many organizations who also belong, and were present at this national event. For instance the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico sent a group...

You're digging the hole deeper.
The association is there. He wasn't just their attorney for one case.

 

[Frogman]

So, someone please educate me...

What if say, Obama gets into Office and later it's found that indeed he WAS born in Kenya, or that he WAS an Indonesian citizen at one time as a kid? Obviously, with a democrat majority in power, they won't impeach him. What are the alternatives then?

Thanks.

 

[fossten]

So, someone please educate me...

What if say, Obama gets into Office and later it's found that indeed he WAS born in Kenya, or that he WAS an Indonesian citizen at one time as a kid? Obviously, with a democrat majority in power, they won't impeach him. What are the alternatives then?

Thanks.

Yeah, I asked this question earlier. It's hard to say. With Obama in charge of the Justice Department, it would be a choice to either follow the "President," or to do what's right. I suspect the libtards in the DOJ would sit on their hands.

Could result in a civil war.

 

[Calabrio]

Constitutional crisis.

And frankly, I would be genuinely concerned that such a thing could cause our system to implode.

 

[foxpaws]

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States. Article II Section 1

He would be required to step down. Period. This is an not impeachable offense, it isn't subject to court, it is a matter of constitutional decree. (I asked a federal circuit court of appeals judge I know this question - that was his answer, not mine).

If you want to talk ayers/obama connection Calabrio - please go to the other thread - I can't take everyone on everywhere... even I have some limits twinkle lobs... And then you can tell me where you get your information... OK?

Guess, what, until things change, walking on the US Flag is not against the law, it currently is a form of peaceful protest. And Ayers charges were dropped, too bad the big old government was so excited about prosecuting him they sort of over stepped their bounds... caught up in a little 4th Amendment problem...

And no, he has no regrets. Is that a bad thing? He hasn't wuzzed up and said "oh dear, I was young, I was stupid" Ayers believed his cause, and that his protest methods were appropriate.

Yes, I have read Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, think globally, act locally. Work within the system, be passive, non-challenging. By running for office, Barack has left small-d democracy, as advocated by Alinsky, and is working instead within the political system, big D.

Ayers and Obama and Patricia Graham, president, The Spencer Foundation, and former dean, Harvard Graduate School of Education are just some of the members of the CAC (Obama and Graham sat on the board) they would all have the shared agenda of the CAC, a common goal...

"Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that's where it's really at" As you said, the Weathermen weren't just anti-war terrorists...

Yes, the former dean of Havard's Graduate School of Educations, who sat on the board obviously believed that, if you conclude that Ayers and Obama had similar goals, and the only place where they overlapped were education boards, then you must assume that everyone that sat on the boards also embraced the same radical philosophy.

Let's see who else spoke at the Heartland Democratic Presidency forum, which ACORN was just a participant, they didn't organize, or have anything to do with the forum, other than to be an attending group, with speakers and attendees...
Edwards, Kucinich, Dodd, Hillary (by phone, because that was the day her campaign employees were being held hostage in New Hampshire) and Obama, Oklahoma City Mayor Mike Cornett, LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Doug Palmer, mayor of Trenton, NJ, and the list goes on...

Want to make the connection... Hillary also spoke at the ACORN national convention in 2006.

Villaraigosa worked with ACORN to draft a law against banks’ predatory lending practices that charge high interest rates to unsuspecting—predominantly elderly and working class home buyers.

I have more - Kuchinich - maybe he, the UFO and ACORN all got together one night under an oak tree.

 

[cammerfe]

Yeah, they probably did. That's a pretty good list of secular progressive nit-wits.
Those of Ayers ilk have no redeeming social value. They advocated, AND PRACTICED violence. They are terrorists. And they deserve to be treated as terrorists.
KS

 

[Calabrio]

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States. Article II Section 1

He would be required to step down. Period. This is an not impeachable offense, it isn't subject to court, it is a matter of constitutional decree. (I asked a federal circuit court of appeals judge I know this question - that was his answer, not mine).

If you want to talk ayers/obama connection Calabrio - please go to the other thread - I can't take everyone on everywhere... even I have some limits twinkle lobs... And then you can tell me where you get your information... OK?

Guess, what, until things change, walking on the US Flag is not against the law, it currently is a form of peaceful protest. And Ayers charges were dropped, too bad the big old government was so excited about prosecuting him they sort of over stepped their bounds... caught up in a little 4th Amendment problem...

And no, he has no regrets. Is that a bad thing? He hasn't wuzzed up and said "oh dear, I was young, I was stupid" Ayers believed his cause, and that his protest methods were appropriate.

Yes, I have read Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, think globally, act locally. Work within the system, be passive, non-challenging. By running for office, Barack has left small-d democracy, as advocated by Alinsky, and is working instead within the political system, big D.

Ayers and Obama and Patricia Graham, president, The Spencer Foundation, and former dean, Harvard Graduate School of Education are just some of the members of the CAC (Obama and Graham sat on the board) they would all have the shared agenda of the CAC, a common goal...

"Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that's where it's really at" As you said, the Weathermen weren't just anti-war terrorists...

Yes, the former dean of Havard's Graduate School of Educations, who sat on the board obviously believed that, if you conclude that Ayers and Obama had similar goals, and the only place where they overlapped were education boards, then you must assume that everyone that sat on the boards also embraced the same radical philosophy.

Let's see who else spoke at the Heartland Democratic Presidency forum, which ACORN was just a participant, they didn't organize, or have anything to do with the forum, other than to be an attending group, with speakers and attendees...
Edwards, Kucinich, Dodd, Hillary (by phone, because that was the day her campaign employees were being held hostage in New Hampshire) and Obama, Oklahoma City Mayor Mike Cornett, LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Doug Palmer, mayor of Trenton, NJ, and the list goes on...

Want to make the connection... Hillary also spoke at the ACORN national convention in 2006.

Villaraigosa worked with ACORN to draft a law against banks’ predatory lending practices that charge high interest rates to unsuspecting—predominantly elderly and working class home buyers.

I have more - Kuchinich - maybe he, the UFO and ACORN all got together one night under an oak tree.

Thanks Foxpaws, you basically confirmed EVERYTHING I said.
How that helps your cause, I don't know.... but it certainly made my point.

 

[fossten]

Guess, what, until things change, walking on the US Flag is not against the law, it currently is a form of peaceful protest. And Ayers charges were dropped, too bad the big old government was so excited about prosecuting him they sort of over stepped their bounds... caught up in a little 4th Amendment problem...

Peaceful protest? Is that what you call it? I call it a disgrace. Ah well, tomato, tomahto.

And no, he has no regrets. Is that a bad thing? He hasn't wuzzed up and said "oh dear, I was young, I was stupid" Ayers believed his cause, and that his protest methods were appropriate.

Um...WHAT? "Protest methods?" What the hell are you smoking? You actually have the audacity to sugarcoat "terrorism" with "protest methods?" That's way out there, even for you. Sympathize much?

Yes, the former dean of Havard's Graduate School of Educations, who sat on the board obviously believed that, if you conclude that Ayers and Obama had similar goals, and the only place where they overlapped were education boards, then you must assume that everyone that sat on the boards also embraced the same radical philosophy.

Given your list below, I have no problem making that assumption. And so what? Your red herring doesn't distract from the issue at hand - that Obama embraced his radical philosophy.

Edwards, Kucinich, Dodd, Hillary (by phone, because that was the day her campaign employees were being held hostage in New Hampshire) and Obama, Oklahoma City Mayor Mike Cornett, LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Doug Palmer, mayor of Trenton, NJ, and the list goes on...

Want to make the connection... Hillary also spoke at the ACORN national convention in 2006.

Villaraigosa worked with ACORN to draft a law against banks’ predatory lending practices that charge high interest rates to unsuspecting—predominantly elderly and working class home buyers.

I have more - Kuchinich - maybe he, the UFO and ACORN all got together one night under an oak tree.

Yep.

 

[fossten]

"But - but - Ayers was just some guy in my neighborhood!"

 

[foxpaws]

Thanks Foxpaws, you basically confirmed EVERYTHING I said.
How that helps your cause, I don't know.... but it certainly made my point.

Why thanks - I could tell you needed my confirmation...

 

[foxpaws]

Peaceful protest? Is that what you call it? I call it a disgrace. Ah well, tomato, tomahto.

Well, it might be a disgrace - but not an illegal disgrace... Have you read Ron Paul's opinion on the Amendment- it is pretty good...
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul99.html

Um...WHAT? "Protest methods?" What the hell are you smoking? You actually have the audacity to sugarcoat "terrorism" with "protest methods?" That's way out there, even for you. Sympathize much?

Some sort of peach infused something in the hookah, I think, I am not sure, I think at some point during strip backgammon things might have gotten slightly illegal...

But, I do know Ayer's called his actions 'protest methods'... not me..

Given your list below, I have no problem making that assumption. And so what? Your red herring doesn't distract from the issue at hand - that Obama embraced his radical philosophy.

I still have yet to see any evidence of the two men crossing paths outside of education interests. When asked by a newspaper at the time Obama was on the board of the CAC what books he was currently reading... Obama came up with Ayers book - lo and behold he was reading a book by one of the founders of the foundation he was currently on the board of...hummmmmm subversive... A book on education at that -

I haven't seen anything in Obama's statements that show that he has embraced the philosophy of the Weathermen... It still reeks of guilt by association.

 

[fossten]

Well, it might be a disgrace - but not an illegal disgrace... Have you read Ron Paul's opinion on the Amendment- it is pretty good...
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul99.html


Some sort of peach infused something in the hookah, I think, I am not sure, I think at some point during strip backgammon things might have gotten slightly illegal...

But, I do know Ayer's called his actions 'protest methods'... not me..



I still have yet to see any evidence of the two men crossing paths outside of education interests. When asked by a newspaper at the time Obama was on the board of the CAC what books he was currently reading... Obama came up with Ayers book - lo and behold he was reading a book by one of the founders of the foundation he was currently on the board of...hummmmmm subversive... A book on education at that -

I haven't seen anything in Obama's statements that show that he has embraced the philosophy of the Weathermen... It still reeks of guilt by association.

'Mark My Word' is a blurb about someone's favorite book at the time, not just a book somebody's reading.

You're also consistently glossing over and ignoring the FACT that Obama LIED when he said Ayers was just some guy in his neighborhood.
How many times have you read and reviewed a book written by some guy in your neighborhood, served on a board with him,
shared an office building with him for 3 years, had your spouse host conferences with him?

Keep moving the goalposts - I know you don't want to believe Obama had anything to do with Ayers, regardless of the iceberg theory or the smoke/fire theory.
I'm sure if there was footage of the two sitting in a bar laughing and joking about using communism to overthrow the government,
you'd find a way to explain it away so that you can justify your vote. But you're no longer arguing; you're simply denying.

I will repeat what I have said before - my candidate has never served on a board with a terrorist like Timothy McVeigh, nor reviewed any of his books.

Face it, Obama couldn’t pass the background check necessary to even be a State trooper in Alaska.

Will you change your tune if it comes out that Ayers wrote Obama's book?