If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Chicago Boyz)   "Looking at Ayers, one is forced to ask exactly what kind of leftist extremism would be considered unacceptable by Obama and his cohorts."   (chicagoboyz.net) divider line 211
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

665 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 Aug 2008 at 12:50 PM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



211 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-08-27 02:42:02 PM
Magorn: which in most cases won't even cover your overhead.

Cocaine is expensive.
 
2008-08-27 02:42:46 PM
BojanglesPaladin: cousin-merle: Obama is such a dick to have killed that guy.

NOT the point being made. Not even close. Nice lame-O strawman though.


Don't worry about it. As long as they can make a retort, no matter how far-fetched, they think they have won.
 
2008-08-27 02:44:27 PM
BojanglesPaladin: I think that is the more relevant question relating to Obama and Ayers association: What was he saying at the time? (NOT when he was a young radical activist/terrorist and when Obama was 8 years old living in Indonesia).

So let's look:

Ayers is on record in 2000 as saying that he does not regret the bombings, (but wishing they had done more) as well as a number of other distasteful things.

"We weren't extreme enough in fighting against the war," Ayers told the Chicago Tribune in 2001. In his memoirs, he said "Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon.".

Here's another:
Ayers was asked by an interviewer for the PBS television program Independent Lens, "How do you feel about what you did? Would you do it again under similar circumstances?" He replied:

'I've thought about this a lot. Being almost 60, it's impossible to not have lots and lots of regrets about lots and lots of things, but the question of did we do something that was horrendous, awful? ... I don't think so. I think what we did was to respond to a situation that was unconscionable.

I am less interested in what Ayers is saying TODAY than I am in what he was saying during the years he was working with Obama when no one was paying attention.

Also, Bernadette Dorn often gets overlooked in the discussion on Ayers, and she is equally (if not more) reprehensible and as the partners of Ayers, also part of Obama's Chicago political circle.


Can you point to anything Obama has said or done in his legislative career that you think demonstrates the tight relationship between him and Ayers? You know, that job where he makes laws... The job he will no longer even have as President...
 
2008-08-27 02:47:24 PM
BojanglesPaladin: NOT the point being made. Not even close. Nice lame-O strawman though.

It IS the point. You keep claiming there is some nebulous relationship and that it reflects on Obama's judgment. What has OBAMA done to reinforce this view of yours? Put up or shut up.

samimgreen: Don't worry about it. As long as they can make a retort, no matter how far-fetched, they think they have won.

How many people do you think are typing at my keyboard?
 
2008-08-27 02:48:32 PM
cousin-merle: How many people do you think are typing at my keyboard?

You're so vain. I bet you think this post is only about you, don't you.
 
2008-08-27 02:50:06 PM
samimgreen: Once again, it was a response to the person who tried to make it look like Obama had never said anything positive about the man. Way to once again try to redirect the conversation to make it look like I have did not make my point.

On one side, we have John McCain vehemently defending his buddy-buddy stance with George Bush, taking umbrage over people who say that he and Bush do not agree on a vast amount of things.

On the other side, we have Obama saying that:

"Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn became respectable fixtures in mainstream liberal Chicago years ago."

"Ayers is now mainstream - an educator with distinguished professor status."

By the accounts that I have read, Ayers is indeed an educator with distinguished professor status. I haven't read anything about how Ayers is a despicable fixture in mainstream liberal Chicago, so that's probably true as well.

Yes, we get it. You're trying really hard to equate Ayers with the Unabomber or Timothy McVeigh. I'm sorry to inform you, but they're just not the same. If they were, Ayers would be in prison right now. But it's kinda fortunate for you, because if Ayers WAS like the Unabomber or McVeigh, Obama never would have met him, and then what would you have to biatch about?
 
2008-08-27 02:50:21 PM
samimgreen: You're so vain. I bet you think this post is only about you, don't you.

You're right, posts with my name in them are not about me.

samimgreen, you're a dick. That statement was not about you, though.
 
2008-08-27 02:54:53 PM
BojanglesPaladin: I am less interested in what Ayers is saying TODAY than I am in what he was saying during the years he was working with Obama when no one was paying attention.

...because?

Because Obama agrees with him?
Because Obama has been influenced by him?

Spell it out for us. Tell us why this is such a dangerous thing.
 
2008-08-27 02:57:22 PM
cousin-merle: samimgreen: You're so vain. I bet you think this post is only about you, don't you.

You're right, posts with my name in them are not about me.

samimgreen, you're a dick. That statement was not about you, though.


Just so you know, your reading comprehension is at extreme levels of fail.
 
2008-08-27 02:59:15 PM
Lando Lincoln: You're trying really hard to equate Ayers with the Unabomber or Timothy McVeigh. I'm sorry to inform you, but they're just not the same

You're right, the WU only killed one person and maimed another. You're right. And he wishes, today, that he had done more.
 
2008-08-27 03:04:01 PM
samimgreen: Just so you know, your reading comprehension is at extreme levels of fail.

Says the person who used "they" in a response to someone talking to a single person. Oh, I get it now, you were using generalities to get a rise out of people. Wow, you're clever. I hope teacher gives you first choice out of the toy box today.
 
2008-08-27 03:07:31 PM
cousin-merle: Says the person who used "they" in a response to someone talking to a single person.

Nice way to respond to a post that was not even directed at you, just about people like you. And thank you for making my original point for me.

/goes to play with favorite toy
//fapfapfapfap
 
2008-08-27 03:08:22 PM
Magorn: A lot of the southern states do that, and by an large its an utter failure because the state, which will spend infinite money on police and prosecutors tend to cap reimbursement for defense lawyers at $35/hr, which in most cases won't even cover your overhead. It got so bad in some places that lawyers stopped signing up for these jobs and the Judges started ordering them to take the cases on pain of contempt of court.

You and BMulligan raise a point I hadn't been aware of - reimbursements for defense expenditures. I'm sure the State (which currently administers the PD program too, non?), once unburdened of having to staff and maintain PD offices all over, could be bothered to set up a fund and a clearing house for expenditures. Currently, the prosecution gets whatever it wants with (relative to indigent defendants) unlimited spending? That seems like an unfair system to me.

If both sides draw from a common fund (money which is currently used to pay PDs and finance only the state's research), there is more incentive for the state to try cases expeditiously and more ability for the defense to provide an adequate defense.

Again, I'm not a lawyer, and before this half-baked plan hits the market, the holes will have to be plugged and the major eventualities planned for.

// fark Bill Ayers, Bernadette Dohrn and anyone claiming they've unduly influenced Obama
// who here knows people in jail/prison?
 
2008-08-27 03:10:47 PM
I'm really not a fan of fanatical extremism, but in terms of psychotic adherence to an ideology, I'd rather err on the side of the Chicago Eight than fascist douchebags like Liddy and North.

These 60's radicals like the Weathermen were generally harmless crackpots, just "revolutionaries" who incited some bullshiat and (like the Greenwich Village incident) farked up a few times. Meanwhile, monsters like Liddy and North have done some downright obscene and horrible things in the name of "fighting" people like that. That North and Liddy aren't in jail and seen with respect in the media while the comparatively harmless "radicals" of the 60's are considered terrorists is just... sad.

I'm not even saying that the Weathermen should get a free pass, per se (though Ayers really has done fark-all but talk about radicalism for the last thirty years), but that they are reviled while converse extremists are respected is sad. Liddy and North have higher body counts than virtually any 60's "terrorist" group.
 
2008-08-27 03:11:08 PM
mattbutler99: Look..,.here's the issue....

Obama was just starting his political career, and he looked around his district, and determined that some of the most influential political figures around were Ayers, Daly, and Rev. Wright....

He knew they were bad people, but he's the most politically expedient politician that I've ever seen...

So, he makes a deal with the devils....and rises up through the community organizer ranks...


upload.wikimedia.org

Here is a picture of Walter Annenberg with Ronald Reagan. He is the man that asked Ayers and Obama to sit on the board of his foundation together. Annenberg held several fundraisers at his home for Reagan. This means that Reagan was a terrorist.
 
2008-08-27 03:11:09 PM
All you people trying to paint this relationship that Obama has to Ayers as two ships passing in the night need to remember that Obama defended Ayers. He called him "mainstream". A guy that bombed government buildings is "mainstream" to Obama.

So whether or not he was actually close to the guy, and I believe he was, it's irrelevant. He defended this nutjob. So now he can be attacked for it.

/conservative non-Republican
//note voting for McCain or any other Republican
 
2008-08-27 03:12:03 PM
cousin-merle
You keep claiming there is some nebulous relationship and that it reflects on Obama's judgment.

I don't recall claiming that affiliation with Ayers speaks to Obama's judgement.

Lando Lincoln
Spell it out for us.

I think it (along with Obama's own statements, and other Chicago political affiliations) highlight a significant gap between Obama the brand and Obama the man. His political affiliations speak to a far more left oriented political world-view than the 'post-partisan', moderate candidate that is being advertised. I think the descrepancy between what we are being sold and what we may ultimately purchase are important. Many people do not think it is important, or have completed their own 'consumer research' to the level they are satisfied with. I am not satisfied yet.

But Lando, You KNOW this already :) And every time you keep insisting that the question shouldn't even be asked, and anyone who does is a Bushiate Obama underminer. So go ahead.
 
2008-08-27 03:16:07 PM
BojanglesPaladin: cousin-merle
You keep claiming there is some nebulous relationship and that it reflects on Obama's judgment.

I don't recall claiming that affiliation with Ayers speaks to Obama's judgement.

Lando Lincoln
Spell it out for us.

I think it (along with Obama's own statements, and other Chicago political affiliations) highlight a significant gap between Obama the brand and Obama the man. His political affiliations speak to a far more left oriented political world-view than the 'post-partisan', moderate candidate that is being advertised. I think the descrepancy between what we are being sold and what we may ultimately purchase are important. Many people do not think it is important, or have completed their own 'consumer research' to the level they are satisfied with. I am not satisfied yet.

But Lando, You KNOW this already :) And every time you keep insisting that the question shouldn't even be asked, and anyone who does is a Bushiate Obama underminer. So go ahead.


Um, who exactly said Obama is a moderate? I don't think he's the OMG SUPER COMMIE UBERLIBERAL that the right-wing talking heads are claiming he is, but I don't think he's a moderate. Frankly, if anything he's showing how a relatively liberal political position can be put forth eloquently and enthusiastically without the sort of fervor that would otherwise turn away "moderates."
 
2008-08-27 03:16:28 PM
samimgreen: Nice way to respond to a post that was not even directed at you, just about people like you. And thank you for making my original point for me.

You had a point? Oh yeah, what was it? Some people make responses? Genius. It's OK that you missed the point I was making, but I'll give you a second chance since no one else wants to try.

Can you point to anything Obama has said or done in his legislative career that you think demonstrates the tight relationship between him and Ayers? You know, that job where he makes laws... The job he will no longer even have as President...
 
2008-08-27 03:19:00 PM
samimgreen:
You're right, the WU only killed one person and maimed another. You're right. And he wishes, today, that he had done more.


That's extremely disingenuous.

You're taking it to mean that he wishes he killed more people when that was (possibly, can't say for sure) neither the intended meaning of his statement, nor the intended purpose of the terrorist organization he was a part of.

What are we expecting here? If Obama and Ayers sit around sipping martinis all weekend long discussing the nuances of different communist ideologies, do you really think that we're going to have some sort of government mandated penagon-bombings and policeman maimings if Obama takes office? What is so threatening about a washed up communist, exactly?
 
2008-08-27 03:20:12 PM
BojanglesPaladin:
But you were saying they were just vandals?


Actually I was very specific in my comment. While there was speculation, and some postscript that they may have done it, they were never actually tied to it. In all likelihood they were likely involved, it doesn't how ever change the fact that in the main campaign later they did try and were successful at avoiding any fatalities. They planted bombs on at least 26 different high profile locations and occasions, if we include the SF police bombing, causing two deaths. Its hard to imagine that the casualty level would be that low with that many different bombings unless they were specifically trying to avoid fatalities. At the time of the SF bombing, they were attacking empty police cars in a number of locations, and the bomb in question was planted in the parking lot of the police station, which seems to indicate to me along with all of their other activities they were not actually targeting officers but merely continuing on the same tract of their state goal of sabotage against the government.

While I will concede the point yes there were some casualties, your original point that they were setting bombs to kill unsuspecting people is still incorrect. If it was then the Weathermen were the most inept terrorist organization in the world. The purpose of the bombs were to destroy government property.
 
2008-08-27 03:20:15 PM
BojanglesPaladin: I don't recall claiming that affiliation with Ayers speaks to Obama's judgement

So what you're saying is, you've got nothing? I mean, it shouldn't be hard to show us what Obama has already done in the legislature since he has all these far-left extremist anti-American associations.

Or do you like to just make things up in your head and expect other people to take you seriously?
 
2008-08-27 03:22:17 PM
El_Dan
Why does every trollbait article on fark have a headline that consists of a hackish quote?

Because the intellectual capacity of trolls has gone way down, and admins have an "any port in a storm" attitude about it?
 
2008-08-27 03:24:03 PM
cousin-merle: tight

Why do you add caveats?
 
2008-08-27 03:24:26 PM
BojanglesPaladin: I think the descrepancy between what we are being sold and what we may ultimately purchase are important.

Undoubtedly, but what candidate has ever advertised exactly who he was? Do you expect Obama to shift considerably farther to the left than his political record shows?
 
2008-08-27 03:24:58 PM
mrexcess: Because the intellectual capacity of trolls has gone way down, and admins have an "any port in a storm" attitude about it?

Because the need for intellectually capable trolls has gone way down?
 
2008-08-27 03:25:34 PM
Tokay: Do you expect Obama to shift considerably farther to the left than his political record shows?

How would that be possible?
 
2008-08-27 03:27:40 PM
Tokay: You're taking it to mean that he wishes he killed more people when that was (possibly, can't say for sure) neither the intended meaning of his statement, nor the intended purpose of the terrorist organization he was a part of.

No, I'm saying that I have not read anywhere that he was sorry that someone died but have read that he wishes he had done more, that more had been done. I could almost see his point if the acts were done against 'things,' but people had been included.
 
2008-08-27 03:27:46 PM
samimgreen: Why do you add caveats?

Answer it as best as you can. I'm not trying to play word games.
 
2008-08-27 03:27:48 PM
samimgreen: Tokay: Do you expect Obama to shift considerably farther to the left than his political record shows?

How would that be possible?


Do you really want me to answer that? If Obama is as far left as your scale goes, I envy you.
 
2008-08-27 03:29:30 PM
mattbutler99: Everybody that he's ever run against has fallen out of the race and so he's never been vetted or even run against anybody...

Everything has been offered to him on a silver (or affirmitive action) platter...


You're a loony.
 
2008-08-27 03:34:03 PM
At the time of the SF bombing, they were attacking empty police cars in a number of locations, and the bomb in question was planted in the parking lot on a window ledge of the police station

At least that is my recollection.

your original point that they were setting bombs to kill unsuspecting people is still incorrect.

Not when these bombs were specifically built with nails and metal shavings.

Are you trying to argue that the Weathermen were NOT terrorists? My point was that they fit exactly the text book definition of terrorists. The IRA also calls in bombs and also (sometimes) tried to avoid innocent deaths. But the IRA DID kill innocents, and they ARE terrorists. And so are the Weathermen. And so were Ayers and Dorn.

Now please note that I do not hold Obama accountable for their terrorist actions, and I am more interested in the association from the standpoint of the radical ideology still being espoused by Ayers and Dorn, and not the fact that they are somehow still active terrorists or are even calling for terrorist activities - although I do consider Ayers to be a thuroughly reprehensible unrepentant former terrorist.

I thought this of Ayers and Dorn LONG before Obama even gave his DNC convention speech and anyone even knew his name. In fact I discovered the association almost by accident a few weeks before Hillary 'outed' it in the debate while I was doing research on Obama's Chicago days. Atthe time, I thought 'It can't be THAT Ayers, must be some other cat'. Sadly, it WAS that Ayers, and that Dorn, and that regular association.

I fully understand that for many people this is of limited importance.
 
2008-08-27 03:36:54 PM
cousin-merle: Can you point to anything Obama has said or done in his legislative career that you think demonstrates the tight relationship between him and Ayers? You know, that job where he makes laws... The job he will no longer even have as President...

I hear he kicked off a campaign/had a fundraiser at Ayers' house.

/President? You're kidding, right? Hell, I'm not voting for either of them and can see that Obama's not going to win.
 
2008-08-27 03:39:48 PM
samimgreen
Because the need for intellectually capable trolls has gone way down?

Since you say that, I presume you know what that need consist(s|ed) of. Could you explain it to me? Why do we need trolls, again?
 
2008-08-27 03:40:19 PM
samimgreen: Tokay: You're taking it to mean that he wishes he killed more people when that was (possibly, can't say for sure) neither the intended meaning of his statement, nor the intended purpose of the terrorist organization he was a part of.

No, I'm saying that I have not read anywhere that he was sorry that someone died but have read that he wishes he had done more, that more had been done. I could almost see his point if the acts were done against 'things,' but people had been included.


By and large, the bombing campaign WAS against "things". The Weathermen killed more of their OWN people in the bombings than anybody else, do you also take his statement to mean he wishes more of his old comrades dead? Come on.

Also, maybe Ayers doesn't regret the deaths. Maybe every anniversary of the bombing, he goes and dances on Sgt. McConnel's grave. You still haven't substantially tied any of this to Obama or how he plans to govern if he takes office. You know, the important stuff.

Obama's left-leanings aren't going to come from association. They're going to come from his voting record and the bills he authored.
 
2008-08-27 03:41:55 PM
BojanglesPaladin: cousin-merle
You keep claiming there is some nebulous relationship and that it reflects on Obama's judgment.

I don't recall claiming that affiliation with Ayers speaks to Obama's judgement.

Lando Lincoln
Spell it out for us.

I think it (along with Obama's own statements, and other Chicago political affiliations) highlight a significant gap between Obama the brand and Obama the man. His political affiliations speak to a far more left oriented political world-view than the 'post-partisan', moderate candidate that is being advertised. I think the descrepancy between what we are being sold and what we may ultimately purchase are important. Many people do not think it is important, or have completed their own 'consumer research' to the level they are satisfied with. I am not satisfied yet.


So you'll continue to throw baseless accusations until you are satisfied?
 
2008-08-27 03:43:35 PM
what's really astounding to me is i just discovered evidence that ronald reagan was a communist sympathizer.

upload.wikimedia.org

just look, there he is in the same room as gorbachev!
 
2008-08-27 03:45:54 PM
mrexcess: Since you say that, I presume you know what that need consist(s|ed) of. Could you explain it to me? Why do we need trolls, again?

Trolls create clicks on a website with a business model based on clicks. Tada!
 
2008-08-27 03:46:08 PM
This one is going to leave a mark.
His campaign is pretty much stillborn.
Stillborns are awful.
All that waiting and for what.
Sad.
 
2008-08-27 03:50:18 PM
It is the job of every Republican candidate since Reagan to destroy the opponent in August. Stick them fatally. Obama's baggage is just as good if not better than Kerry's and Kerry's was pretty sweet baggage. The race is decided in August. This race has already been decided with the Ayers attacks and the OBama machine hubris. He's waited too long to attack. The Repubs knew exactly when to get him, when he was unable to respond during the run up to his acceptance speech during convention week.
 
2008-08-27 03:50:32 PM
RevMercutio
So you'll continue to throw baseless accusations until you are satisfied?

I'm not sure you understand the qualifications for 'baseless' or exactly what you consider the 'accusations' I am making are.

Could you explain what you think I am accusing Obama of? Because I'm pretty sure I just spelled it out.
 
2008-08-27 03:56:35 PM
Tokay: By and large, the bombing campaign WAS against "things". The Weathermen killed more of their OWN people in the bombings than anybody else, do you also take his statement to mean he wishes more of his old comrades dead? Come on.

No, it looks like he didn't care and that their deaths were smaller than the 'cause', that he had the right to make that judgement. Surely, please tell me you can see the difference between, "Yeah, people got killed, but I wish I had done more even if more people were killed" and "Yeah, people were killed. I am sorry about that. I wish we had done more, though, and tried to keep any more from being killed"?
 
2008-08-27 03:57:08 PM
BojanglesPaladin: RevMercutio
So you'll continue to throw baseless accusations until you are satisfied?

I'm not sure you understand the qualifications for 'baseless' or exactly what you consider the 'accusations' I am making are.

Could you explain what you think I am accusing Obama of? Because I'm pretty sure I just spelled it out.


You actually don't seem to be saying anything other than "He has CONNECTIONS!"
I'm still not quite sure where you're going with this.

Obama could be a closet marxist, but what does it matter if it doesn't show in his governance?
 
2008-08-27 03:57:40 PM
Tokay: You still haven't substantially tied any of this to Obama or how he plans to govern if he takes office. You know, the important stuff.

I haven't tried to. My only addition to the discussion was to refute the person who claimed that Obama had never said anything positive about the man.
 
2008-08-27 04:01:45 PM
samimgreen: Tokay: By and large, the bombing campaign WAS against "things". The Weathermen killed more of their OWN people in the bombings than anybody else, do you also take his statement to mean he wishes more of his old comrades dead? Come on.

No, it looks like he didn't care and that their deaths were smaller than the 'cause', that he had the right to make that judgement. Surely, please tell me you can see the difference between, "Yeah, people got killed, but I wish I had done more even if more people were killed" and "Yeah, people were killed. I am sorry about that. I wish we had done more, though, and tried to keep any more from being killed"?


I do indeed see the difference. The trouble is, he said neither.

And on top of that, I fail to see how it's relevant.
 
2008-08-27 04:07:41 PM
Tokay
Obama could be a closet marxist, but what does it matter if it doesn't show in his governance?

Except that we have such liited examples of his governance, and it does show up in some of it. More concerning to me on that specific topic is the idea of electing a leftist President to serve with a left controled Democratic congress. It is a BAD idea to have the executive and both houses of the Legislature in lock-step with each other in the same extreme ideology.

I think the last 8 years should have made this clear to everyone. I don't want to replace neo-cons with neo-commies :)

If I was reasonably sure that the [R]s would regain control or even significantly narrow the margin in congress -or- if I was reasonably sure that Obama was from the 'conservative' wing of the Democratic party, I might be more inclined to vote for the guy. With a countering congress to keep him from doing anything really stupid, I would be more comfortable.

But the more I look into it, the more I think that Obama and Pelosi are cut from roughly the same ideological cloth. And things like Ayers, and Dayley, and Wright seem to support that assesment.

That is my assesment. Others have looked at some of the same information and have arrived at different conclusions. All hail diversity.
 
2008-08-27 04:21:59 PM
samimgreen: I hear he kicked off a campaign/had a fundraiser at Ayers' house.

Right...and this affected Obama's voting decisions how? Honestly, I know you're not going to try, but at least pretend better.

Hell, I'm not voting for either of them

You sound like such a strong independent...
 
2008-08-27 04:26:20 PM
cousin-merle: Right...and this affected Obama's voting decisions how?

Ahh, I get it. People are always incredibly open about everything that everyone should know everything. There are never things that are hidden. I mean, how did your uncle touching you when you were younger affect your decisions later? How did your continued and willful association with him affect these decision?

/ask a stupid question...
 
2008-08-27 04:29:28 PM
samimgreen: /ask a stupid question...

So, you've got nothing. We should all be scared simply because Obama and Ayers have met. Gotcha.
 
2008-08-27 04:35:43 PM
cousin-merle: Obama and Ayers have met.

Yeah, that's pretty much all there is to it. They met. I think one of them bumped into the other one on the street and said 'excuse me'. Yep. That's it. All there is to it. Nothing more to see here, folks. Move along.
 
Displayed 50 of 211 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report