Clinton hits Obama over friendship with 60’s radical

[AZXD]

Hmmm,
How did this slip through the cracks ??
Anyone got McCain's email address?

Clinton hits Obama over friendship with 60’s radical
by Bill Sammon, The Examiner
Apr 18, 2008 3:00 AM

WASHINGTON - Encouraged by the fallout over Barack Obama’s ex-pastor, Hillary Clinton’s campaign on Thursday attacked Obama for befriending a radical who once bragged of bombing the Pentagon.


Clinton seemed to be trying to turn William Ayers, a former member of the Weather Underground, into the next Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s controversial spiritual mentor. In a New York Times article published on Sept. 11, 2001, Ayers boasted of bombing the Pentagon and other government buildings, adding: “I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough.”


That quote was cited Thursday by Clinton spokesman Phil Singer, who questioned why Obama has “maintained a relationship” with Ayers.


The Ayers controversy was raised Wednesday at a Democratic debate by moderator George Stephanopoulos after the question was suggested to him by Sean Hannity during an interview on Hannity’s radio show.


Asked by The Examiner to respond to this line of attack, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe countered that former President Bill Clinton pardoned two members of the Weather Underground. Susan Rosenberg had been in prison for her role in an armed robbery that left three people dead, while Linda Evans had been in prison on weapons and explosive charges in connection to a string of bombings.


“The Clinton campaign for awhile said their total mission was to try and convince superdelegates that we were unelectable because of Reverend Wright, so maybe they’re going to focus on Ayers now,” Plouffe said. “There’s a desperation in the campaign.”


Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson rejected the comparison to Rosenberg and Evans saying Obama’s campaign has called the candidate’s relationship with Ayers “friendly.” The two served on a board together, and Ayers once hosted a fundraiser for Obama.

“We’re not talking about whether or not Senator Obama ran into somebody at an ice cream store in Hyde Park; we’re talking about somebody who was a key supporter of his first race for elected office,” Wolfson said.

No pics of Ayers and Obama. Will this do

[Frenchy]

Old news!

[KEVWYO]

Originally Posted by AZXD

Hmmm,
How did this slip through the cracks ??
Anyone got McCain's email address?



No pics of Ayers and Obama. Will this do

I take it back .... this gets the funniest post of the evening!!!!!!!

[Etta Place]

Originally Posted by AZXD

Hmmm,
How did this slip through the cracks ??
Anyone got McCain's email address?



No pics of Ayers and Obama. Will this do

Yes, old news, but shouldn't this go in the Obama is the Anti-Christ thread?

[AZXD]

It never hurts to be reminded ... Especially when the guy wants to turn all future terrorists over to CNN for martyrdom and a trial.

[trik396]

It may be old news but Ayers got off on a murder charge, I believe. He is a terrorist. Old or not, there's no statute on murder.

[Delija]

No one seems to bother with defining the "relationship" between Ayers and Obama.

Basically my guess is it's because there really isn't one.

Sean Hannity figured this was a good piece of information to use to further drag Obama through the mud? LOL....More proof that Hannity is anything but a journalist. Hell, he even admitted on TV last week (maybe two weeks ago?) That he was indeed just a cheerleader for the right wing.

We lost Tim Russet just a few days ago. At his memorial today Obama and McCain sat next to each other. The Clintons were there. Virtually all of Washington was there to pay RESPECTS to a respectable man who brought respect to his profession.

And now instead of having the wisdom of Russet to serve the American public with his quest to bring the truth to us all, we now have Hannity stepping up to bring lies and innuendo to us all?

Pathetic!

Today (or yesterday) he, Hannity, was again trying to make Michelle Obama a central figure in his attacks on her husband.

Why is it that the right wing comedians - I mean "commentators" rely so heavily on smear tactics? Can it be it's because they have no interest or even knowledge about issues?

You don't hear from the Obama supporters about the details of McCain's personal tribulations regarding his divorce from his first wife. You don't hear about the drug addiction of his wife.

When was the last time (never to my knowledge) that anyone brought up GWB's "relationship" with his brother Neil. Or how it took an act of congress to stop GWB's grandfather to stop doing business with Hitler.

Or how no one could fly in the days immediately after 9/11 except G.H.W. Bush's business partners/friends he spent that day of infamy with...The Bin Ladens from our great ally Saudi Arabia.

I once had dinner in a restaurant and Carlo Gambino was at the next table. So I guess by Hannity's standards I have a "relationship" with the man (or did until he died). I bet he was not only accused of more crimes than Ayers, but probably guilty of at least some of them as well.

It's true that there's no statute of limitations on murder. So common sense tells me that if Ayers was indeed guilty of murder, he'd probably not be involved in the alleged "relationship" he has with Obama, since he'd be too busy either rotting away in prison on death row, or keeping a low profile as a fugitive from justice. He's obviously doing neither.

As for the nature of the Obama/Ayers "relationship, the facts are easy enough to find. My analogy to my "relationship" with Gambino isn't that much of an exaggeration.

If McCain doesn't denounce the smear tactics being employed by the right wing talking heads like Hannity....if he sits back and keeps his mouth shut and lets the "Swiftboating" continue, then that will tell me all I need to know about him. And my plans to vote for McCain (reluctantly in the first place) will certainly change. I'll feel compelled to vote for the guy who is doing what they BOTH had pledged to do....to run their campaigns from the high road.

I never had imagined myself voting for Obama....not until I saw McCain refuse to distance himself from this mudslinging.

Or maybe McCain isn't purposely turning a blind eye to this kind of dirty campaigning.....which leaves us with the other explanation; that he truly IS out of touch with reality.

As I said in an earlier post about all this "Obama is the Anti-Christ" kind of negative campaigning and political arguments here on XDTalk.....the fact that those who support McCain don't do it by giving reasons why they like McCain, only why they "hate" Obama.....the backlash is taking hold at least with me. The "most of the people are wrong most of the time" issue is also making it's rounds in my thought process.

Of course I'll stick to my plan and see how the campaign unfolds between now and November. I'll look forward to the debates and to learning more about what these men are about. But I have to admit....the way things are going so far (and it's way too early for me to make a real decision at this point), my gut reaction at this point is to favor Obama. Certainly until VERY recently I never would have anticipated such a change of heart.

But as of today, I just cannot get past the problem I'm having being on the same side of the political fence as the "angry mob" mentality I see more and more of almost daily right here. How many anti-Obama threads are there now? Any "pro-McCain' threads? None I can recall. (maybe I just missed them?). Lots of negativity. Nothing positive.

Those who can't seem to find real issues (the best they can do is "youth and inexperience"?) - LOL....GWB had ZERO relavant experience to sit in the Oval Office - had no trouble voting for Bush.?????

Yeah, he was the Governor of Texas....presumably giving him more "experience" in an executive branch of govenment than a first term Senator.

But what kind of reults did Bush achieve as Governor of Texas? The record speaks for itself. The guy went from failure in business to failure in government. Proof positive that "experience" and competence are less than meaningless to the right wing. Money and a powerful family are what is valued. Along with promises of tax cuts for the richest 1% and no blow jobs in the Oval Office and delusions of personal two way conversations with God.

.... "issues" that are irrelevant to the office of president....THAT stuff made GWB "worthy" of election. Gay marriage. abortion, having an image of being a good guy to have a few beers with (of course just hypothetically since he stopped drinking and besides, even if he hadn't....THAT is what we want as a president? A "regular guy"? And how many voters would get to hang out and have that beer with their "pal" (and his huge Secret Service contingent?). Yeah, our voters really DO seem that stupid!

I always thought it took an extraordinary guy to be the leader of the free world. I guess I'm just too "old school".

Some say Obama runs on "change" but doesn't have any substance. I'm beginning to believe that maybe it doesn't really matter and that "Change" alone is good enough. After all, according to the anti-Obama crowd, things must be really so screwed up in America that ANY "change" woud be an improvement. I mean we read here how the Clinton's were guilty of something like 40 or so "suspicious deaths". Now Wm. Ayers, a "terrorist' and "murderer" is running free and influencing politicians in Illinois. The Democrats have finally picked a candidate and he's a "traitor", a Muslim and his wife hates America. And McCain is (according to 'prometheus")guilty of treason.

80% of polled Americans say that the country is "on the wrong track" and GWB has such dismal approval ratings that Clinton's approval rating at the time he was being impeached was something like 300% higher.

We're in a seemingly endless war fought for an objective that has been a moving target for five years. No plan on where to go with this war, no real objective (if there was, what did "Mission Accomplished" ever mean?)

So yeah, voting for "change", even if th "change" is a secret (we've voted for a "secret" before.....Nixon ran and won with a promise to implement a "secret plan to bring peace with honor in Vietnam". LOL

So maybe an "empty suit" with nothing but a "speech" (and the ability to speak in complete and stuctured sentences......a "change" from Bush for sure) is all we need at this point.

Negative campaigning? Was Reagan guilty of "negatie campaigning" when he famously asked if we were "better off now than four years ago"?

Are we better off now than 8 years ago?

Anyone here enjoying a fill-up at the gas station these days?

How's the war going (I know.....Judge and others will tell us things are going "great" for us now in Iraq.....but what does that mean? That their civil war is going more the way we'd like? What are OUR interests there? How are THEY working out? Are we having flowers thrown at our troops yet and are we seen as the great liberators as we were in Paris in 1945 like Rumsfeld promised? (Along with a swift and inexpensive victory).

McCain said a week or so ago that it "didn't matter" how long our troops would stay in Iraq. I'd imagine it means a great deal to the families of those that will NEVER come home. And for what? So we can (and have) endorced a new Iraqi constitution that establishes another Islamic theocracy in the Arab world? This is "spreding democracy?"

Yeah...."Change" for the sake of change is starting to make a lot of sense.

If McCain lets people like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter do his dirty work....if he doesn't do as he promised and run a 'positive" campaign based on the issues, then no matter who is or is not the "Anti-Christ", etc., the plain fact will be that the lesser of two evils isn't going to be McCain.

[/rant]

Peace,
D.

[trik396]

Change that I don't feel is necessary. Change for the sake of change is not very intelligent. My wife and myself, along with the rest of my family, are all doing fine, thank you very much. Monetarily we are doing extremely well. Work is good and continues to get better as in the past few years. I don't actually mind paying for higher fuel costs as I think we have been spoiled for way too long as Americans. I'd like to see the prices come down, as most people would, but it doesn't affect me really. I'm not an environmentalist or even close to being a "greenie" but my next house will have solar power and possible some wind turbine power because I think it's pretty neat, saves me money after hard costs, and puts me further off the grid. Things are great on my end. What I'd like to see changed is for our government to get out of our day to day business. Leave me alone. Don't pass more useless legislation, more useless laws. I pay my taxes and don't mind, but I think I pay too much. Certainly don't want to pay any more for liberal social bullcrap. Change? I don't need no stinkin' change.

[trik396]

And for Mr. Ayers... I guess when you are the head of a radical terrorist group and three of your followers are killed building a bomb you designated, then that's not murder.
He got off on a technicality.

[Delija]

Originally Posted by trik396

Change that I don't feel is necessary.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.

Originally Posted by trik396

Change for the sake of change is not very intelligent.

In a general sense, I agree. You'd need to put my words into context and also consider the degree of sarcasm intended.

Originally Posted by trik396

My wife and myself, along with the rest of my family, are all doing fine, thank you very much. Monetarily we are doing extremely well. ...(edit)....(etc., etc., etc). .........

Glad to hear that. I'd say pretty much the same. I've been able to retire at a comparatively young age (probably go back to work eventually out of desire, not need). My taxes were cut before I retired; Bush's policies benefit me personally, the cost of gas and my taxes are non-factors in my life. I don't have as much money as I did four years ago, but that has nothing to do with politics or the economy, I just gave away more than I should have (probably), but I still have more than I can spend - I'll still give away more each year even after decreasing my net worth, than most people earn.

So what? I am not the country, just like you aren't.

I'm not worried about me, and now I know I don't need to worry about you either. That's very comforting.

But there are a few hundred million Americans I can't say the same for. It is them I am concerned about. It is them that I feel need better leadership and government. Cheaper energy, etc.

It is them and their children and their unborn heirs I am concerned about. We are borrowing huge amounts of money from places like China and Saudi Arabia and paying interest on that money, while we are giving away money to places like Iraq with no interest and no expectation of ever being repaid.....we are running up a tab that will most likely have to be paid by generations of Americans yet unborn. I realize this doesn't concern you. Why should it? You won't be paying this debt, you probably won't be alive to see it paid. (Same probability goes for everyone here).

So while it's great that your financial life is comfortable, and certainly I appreciate all the opportunities that I have had and the good fortune I had to go along with those opportunities, I realize that I am not typical and that my position isn't the deciding factor for me in what is best for the country.

Maybe I'm just not self centered enough. I read here (for an example) how one very high profile XDTalk member hopes the housing and mortgage crisis continues and even gets worse so he can get a better deal on a home. The fact that this might possibly benefit him while it would certainly be painful to so many more is the kind of selfishness and ego-centric mentality that I have come to expect from a certain political mindset.....it doesn't mean that I can't find it distasteful. Even childish.

Originally Posted by trik396

. I pay my taxes and don't mind, but I think I pay too much. Certainly don't want to pay any more for liberal social bullcrap. Change? I don't need no stinkin' change.

I have said many times here that I don't mind paying my taxes. I only mind that the money is wasted. So here we agree (sort of). I'm just sure we don't agree on what defines wasteful spending of our tax dollars.

And again....I'm happy for you that YOU "don't need no stinkin' change".

And also again, I could say the same for myself. But I realize that what's been a good decade for me can't be said for most of America.

If I voted based solely on my own interests alone, I'd certainly have a very different voting record than I do.

If I'm walking through the halls of a hospital's emergency room, I really don't feel much concern for the doctors who are calling for tee times - my concern is for the people laying on gurneys with blood on their sheets. My concern is even greater for those who the pencil pushers try to turn away because they can't afford and therefore don't have health insurance.

Clearly your concerns would be different. I guess that's what they mean when they say "that's what makes horse racing".

You feel there's no need for "no stinkin' change". My concerns go
a bit further than the end of my nose as yours apparenty do not.

I look around and I see a need for change. Not for me, but for the country. The fact that you don't care doesn't bother me. The fact that so many don't care does bother me.

Fortunately for both of us, the people will get to express their collective preferences at the voting booths in November. I'm sure they will get what they want.

Peace,
D.