Time to put this to rest...
-
@unknownuser said:
the DailyKos is one of the most liberal web sites on the planet. If they say it's not true, I would believe them.
LOL now you believe the liberal media
You are a moving target.
@unknownuser said:
Big difference between my Obama/Palin image and yours. You put your out there as true
And let me guess, you put yours up because you are racist?
-
Pete, posting a link to a liberal web site debunking this report card was a way to convince you, get it?
Oh, there's that meaningless word again...racist. Is this supposed to bring the conversation to an end? A show stopper. This term only works on guilty white liberals. Hell, even Tom chuckled at the image. I'm sure you wouldn't DREAM of calling him a racist.
-
The left defines its own "truth", independent of the actual facts.. e.g., Clinton's "depends on what the meaning of 'is' is". That is the way of the leftist.
The Ayers quote is "I don't regret setting bombs...I feel we didn't do enough."
Assume Timothy McVeigh had been acquitted because of an error on the part of law enforcement (rather than being convicted and executed). If McCain had his political career opening at the home of McVeigh, the left would be absolutely hysterical. If McCain had only attended some board meetings with McVeigh, the left would be absolutely hysterical. But, the facts don't matter to the leftists. Ayers was acquitted due to technicality. Obama now says William Ayers was rehabilitated. Weeks ago, they just lived in the same neighborhood; their children went to school together; and, Obama was only 8 when Ayers was an active terrorist. How old was Obama when they were meeting together? In his 30's and 40'. The question is, what's the difference between the terrorist Ayers and the terrorist McVeigh? Answer: Justice.
Then, there's J. Wright. It doesn't take much research to know the depth of that 20 year relationship. How could anyone not believe Wright is a racist and a race baiter? Obama never knew.. oh, that's it, Obama never knew. If that's not good enough, read some excerpts from Obama's "Dreams from My Father". Anyone that's has a shred of intellectual honesty can't ignore the racial animosity expressed by Obama.
Obama studied from the original community organizer, Saul Alinsky, author of "Rules for Radicals". Alinsky outlines the basis for Obama's underlying leftist/Marxist political philosophy and the methods for implementing that philosophy. This is the most disturbing connection, because it explains how Obama has been able to convince the intellectually lazy to follow along.
Then, there's T. Rezko,.. then, there's ACORN,.. then, there's the Chicago political machine,... All these are shining examples of political corruption.
These relationships seem to go on and on.
Only the most naive and the most sympathetic to the radical left could ignore Obama's connections. The suggestion that McCain's military service has any equivalency to Ayers is just too lame to elicit a response. McCain isn't perfect, but he's infinitely more desirable than Obama.
It is incomprehensible to me that any US citizen would like to see the US turn into a leftist-socialist-marxist country. And, to all those in other countries around the world, you should be very afraid if the US does turn. I guarantee that you would be in the cross-hairs of such a powerful state. Better be careful what you wish for...
-
Oh boy! not another one.
They call it the 'Halloween vote', scare the masses into voting your way, the conservatives have been doing that for ages and it worked twice with Bush, America is tired of these tactics, and the polls are reflecting that.
WTF is up with all this marxist, communist, socialist talk, missing the cold war? need another McCarthy era?
-
@bellwells said:
...Hell, even Tom chuckled at the image...
Ron, I also expressed my regret for not noticing the glaring racial overtones of the image.
-
@tomsdesk said:
@bellwells said:
...Hell, even Tom chuckled at the image...
Ron, I also expressed my regret for not noticing the glaring racial overtones of the image.
I don't remember that, but I do remember something about you being pissed at yourself that you chuckled.
Pete, we've gone off track about the fraud of Palin's report card. If, in a few seconds, I could find the DailyKos link debunking this, then you must have seen it and the many others that I came across. Apparently, you chose to overlook these dissenting opinions and go right for the Dan Rather solution. I'm disappointed.
-
@david. said:
...intellectually lazy...
It only took my visiting one site to debunk your claims the associations you mentioned indicate "political corruption"...hummmmmmmmm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Community_Organizations_for_Reform_Now
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Rezko
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_AlinskyAlinsky: thank for the heads-up, sounds like someone interesting to read...and kuddos to Obama for studying him!
And finally I gotta say: Your ludicrous comparison of Ayers, who claims to have been involved with three bombings with NO casualties...as intended (no I don't condone, at all!...but did smile at reading they managed to stop the bombing in Vietnam for several days :`), to that heinous murderer McVeigh is unconscionable. You should be ashamed of yourself! -
Thanks Ron...sounds a lot different that way than the first time you mentioned it, huh?!?
-
"Time to put this to rest" is on it's third page. Apparently not time yet.
Hope we don't lose any friends here.
-
Tom, ACORN has admitted fraud in voter sign up. This group should be outlawed and the organizers horse whipped.
-
First, I sometimes disagree strongly with other people. But I have found that if I converse respectfully and try to understand the other person's point of view, I often learn that I have quite a bit in common with the person. I hope that can happen to all of us here.
Second, piling on additional arguments, in this case, other things to be perceived to be bad about Obama, has nothing to do with the original point. Adding additional arguments is typically a distraction used when the first argument has been lost. I won't respond to those.
@david. said:
The left defines its own "truth", independent of the actual facts.. e.g., Clinton's "depends on what the meaning of 'is' is". That is the way of the leftist.
There are immoral politicians on the left and the right. Here Clinton took advantage of a legalism to technically tell the truth while he deceived the grand jury. That made Bill Clinton look bad. I certainly prefer that to "We don't torture." Which is true only if you change the meaning of torture from what it has always been. That made the United States look bad and it made you and me part of an immoral system that tortures people to find out if they are guilty or innocent.
@david. said:
The Ayers quote is "I don't regret setting bombs...I feel we didn't do enough."
First, note the three little dots. That's where the reporter took out some other words. It could be that those words did not change the implication and Bill Ayers wishes he had set more bombs and that he wishes he could have caused death and injury. It also could be that the two sentences were not related and that they were put together to deceive. All of us know that the press sometimes deceives. To find out what his meaning was, the best we can do is read other things he has said and written. NONE of that indicates what is implied.
@david. said:
Assume Timothy McVeigh had been acquitted because of an error on the part of law enforcement (rather than being convicted and executed). If McCain had his political career opening at the home of McVeigh,
If in your example, 1) McVeigh had caused damage to property in an attempt to stop an immoral war instead of killing 168 and injuring 450 of which 19 were children in a day care, as part of his white supremacist beliefs in order to get revenge for "what the U.S. government did at Waco and Ruby Ridge", AND 2) McVeigh had since become a professor of education at a top university, AND 3) McVeigh had become a widely respected leader involved in making his community better, AND 4) McVeigh had committed those crimes almost 40 years ago, AND 5) McVeigh had hosted one of many fund raising meetings for John McCain who was not a close friend, perhaps then some on
@david. said:
the left would be absolutely hysterical.
But I don't think many would, and I wouldn't.
@david. said:
The question is, what's the difference between the terrorist Ayers and the terrorist McVeigh? Answer: Justice.
Do you really believe that, or is this just partisan rhetoric which distracts us from the real issues?
If you think Obama is the wrong choice for President, is this why, or can you tell us your real reasons?
-
Ron: read the article, (I even posted the link for you :`) You'll find only employees, I would guess temps hired short time, were charged in a few cases. I do think they are past overdue changing their way of reimbursing said employees: paying by the signature surely facilitates fraud.
-
I only responded to this thread because there was so little presentation of the other side. I believe I read somewhere else a comparison to "liberal love fest". So true. Schreiber has completely validated my description of the left and it's lack of reliance on truth and facts. There is no moral direction, no right and wrong, no ethical foundation. Just whatever makes one feel good. The left can happily condone millions of abortions of the innocent while expressing outrage about displacing a polar bear. A terrorist or murderer can be respected and contributing member of society as long as he has a PhD, written a few books, etc. Laziness is to be rewarded by taking from those that are independent and self reliant. Those are misguided rationalizations. I don't intend to try to understand it and I won't try to convince the leftists to see things my way. For me, I plan to annoy as many liberal leftists as I can by working hard and being happy.
-
Similar reaction over here.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/oct/12/uselections2008-sarahpalin -
Tom, not only did I read the Wikipedia ACORN page, I also scanned through the talk page, in which there are interesting discussions related to accuracy and bias. Kinda gives one a little background on how Wikipedia is edited and how they strive for impartiality.
ACORN is a left leaning organization. There's nothing wrong with that. I just want this to be acknowledged. Since they are being investigated for voter fraud in 4 or 5 states, I would call this a politically corrupt organization.
-
Ron,
Maybe we should outlaw groups guilty of voter fraud, but that may include the Dems and GOP. Here's a video on them both.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7658182.stm
Peter
-
@pbacot said:
Ron,
Maybe we should outlaw groups guilty of voter fraud, but that may include the Dems and GOP. Here's a video on them both.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7658182.stm
Peter
Peter, voter fraud is voter fraud. The whole matter sickens me as it should all Americans. I have no doubt BOTH the Republicans and Democrats are guilty of this. However, I can't think of a right leaning organization that would be the counterpart to ACORN. If it exists, I would like to know. Seriously.
-
I think with less than a month to election day we are all wearing rose colored glasses:
Which only allow us to see our own point of view.
and if by chance we take those glasses off then our blinders:
Will prevent us from looking in the wrong direction.
As I read these posts I find myself agreeing only with the ones that espouse the same ideology that I subscribe to. I wish we were all a bit more flexible or that the issues that divide us were not so divisive but that's not reality.
Reality is that this country is in a far worse situation than anyone would of, could of, should of imagined. Thankfully which ever candidate is elected they will have NO CHOICE but to take us in a new direction.
Let's all agree to make a wish that the next president has the desire, ability, and backbone to make the necessary changes to get "OUR" country back on the right course for financial, and moral, and ethical leadership.
-
Harvey Leroy "Lee" Atwater (February 27, 1951 – March 29, 1991) was an American political consultant and strategist to the Republican party. He was an advisor of U.S. Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush. He was also a political mentor and close friend of Republican strategist Karl Rove. Atwater invented or improved upon many of the techniques of modern electoral politics, including promulgating unflattering rumors and attempting to drive up opponents' "negative" poll numbers with the aggressive use of opposition research. He has been characterized as the "happy hatchet man" and "Darth Vader" of the Republican Party. In spite of criticisms of Atwater's tactics as unethical and dirty tricks, he was widely regarded as a near-brilliant political operative who helped candidates to win. Karl Rove used such smear tactics in the 2004 election causing a seven polling point drop for John Kerry just days before the election with his "swift boat" scandal that proved to be all lies after the fact.
Lies vs Fraud ... You decide.
-
I think lies and fraud are a world apart. Both sides lie, always have, always will. This is why I can't stand the negative ads. I agree with Tom here in that slight dishonesty or not telling the whole story is tantamount to lying. Fraud is more devious, more nefarious.
Lee Atwater was doing what political operatives have been doing for years. I'm not excusing him, I explaining him, I guess. Look at how Obama gained his Senate seat. He used underhanded, yet perfectly legal, means. What's the difference?
Advertisement