General Question

critter1982's avatar

US Presidency?

Asked by critter1982 (4100 points ) October 5th, 2008

Does it concern anyone here on fluther that Barrack Obama has ties to terrorists and radical Islam? Whether these ties are simply acquaintences or actual friends does not concern me, but rather I am amazed that after 9/11 which only happened 7 years ago, Americans are willing to give somebody with “potentially” significant ties to more than a few radicals, a chance to run for the White House no matter where his “ideologies” stand. This is in no way me trying to argue whether or not Obama has these potential ties, but I am rather asking if people are simply just ignoring these ties or do you believe with no doubt that these ties just don’t exist?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

86 Answers

eambos's avatar

i am not voting for Obama, but where is the evidence for this claim you have? It seems rather absurd.

JackAdams's avatar

I believe that if he had ANY ties whatsoever, that he would have a most difficult time, attempting to hide them from the US PRESS.

Les's avatar

Proof, please. And no links to blogs, Fox Noise or any other illegit websites.

critter1982's avatar

Well at the moment (I know most flutheres HATE foxnews) there is an hour segment on Obama.

Les's avatar

If these ‘terrorists’ you are talking about have anything to do with Bill Ayers, then I can clear some things up for you.

La_chica_gomela's avatar

The ONLY evidence even CLOSE to what you’re talking about, critter, is the Bill Ayers, thing.
This is a link to Reuters, a reliable world news source:
http://www.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=91659&newsChannel=topNews

And it’s spelled BARACK! If you’re not going to call someone by the correct name, you might as well be talking about a different person, IMHO.

critter1982's avatar

La chica (did I spell that right?) I didn’t mean to offend you by my misspelling Barack

gailcalled's avatar

I note that you used this question (asked by you last week) as a jumping off-point for a long polemic against Barack. You don’t have to like him, you don’t have to vote for him but don’t pretend to be taking a neutral position, please.

kevbo's avatar

The presidency is pwned regardless. If Obama isn’t serving elite bankers and elements of the CIA, he’ll be joining JFK.

Edit:: Regarding 9/11, google “LIHOP” & “MIHOP.” That’s my real concern.

critter1982's avatar

@gail: No matter what my belief I think I have the right to ask a neutral question, I was not taking a neutral position. I don’t claim to be neutral on the topic but I didn’t want a bashing session. My attempt was to learn more about how you flutherers (typically liberal Obama voters) felt about the scenario. So gail please go spew your hatred elsewhere.

Les's avatar

Ok, critter. If you can give me proof that he has ties to terrorists and radical Islam, lets discuss. Otherwise, step off.

sndfreQ's avatar

The National Review

proof

Here’s the thing: if you want people to take your argument seriously, at least provide a link for the collective to reference. An informed discussion can’t emanate from conjecture and hearsay.

Les's avatar

Ah. A magazine for ‘conservative’ opinion. Excellent “proof”.

critter1982's avatar

@Les: Because I’m sure a magazine for “liberal” opinions would write the story.

Les's avatar

No no no. That’s not what I mean. They are both biased. How about a neutral source? World news?

La_chica_gomela's avatar

You shouldn’t talk that way to Gail!!!!! She was nothing but polite to you even when your opinion may have been different from yours!!

jlm11f's avatar

[mod says:] I am intervening early in this thread to remind everyone to keep the personal attacks out of your quips. Thank you.

critter1982's avatar

@La chica: I disagree that she was polite. She put words into my mouth and tried to discredit the question because it came from someone with an opinion different than hers.

jlm11f's avatar

As for my personal answer to the Q I consider it the lesser of 2 evils. I hear John McCain has direct ties to Satan. I know this to be a fact, but I cannot provide you with credible non-liberal sources. Does it concern anyone that Johnny has these ties to Satan? I mean especially after 9/11, which was just 7 years ago, are Americans willing to give somebody with potential ties to Satan a chance to run for the White House no matter where his “ideologies” stand.

I also heard McCain eats babies, but that one might have just been a rumor. Funny how these things start

critter1982's avatar

Thanks PnL that was useful. A simple I disregard anybody who even considers him to have ties would have been acceptable. Your right though your mockery of the question is in no way a personal attack, at least not directly. Thanks again.

critter1982's avatar

@Les: I would appreciate some neutral sources regarding Ayers.

Les's avatar

Ok, critter. I will try to answer your original question. All ‘bashing’ aside.
First of all, no, I do not believe that Obama has any ties to terrorists or radical Islam. Lets start with his father. I’m not sure he was Islamic (see, I don’t know everything, either), but let’s say for the sake of argument he was. Maybe someone can correct me. If he was Islamic, there is no proof that he was “radical”. To assume that someone who practices Islam is a radical is just as bad as assuming a Mormon has seven wives. Or that a Christian never uses contraception. Muslims are not bad people. They are incredibly peaceful people, and even if Barack were Muslim (which, it has been proven time and time again, he is NOT), what difference should it make?

Now on to your ‘terrorist’ claim. I believe what you are talking about here is the Weather Underground Bill Ayers thing. If so, let me also say that there is no credence to this claim, either. The Weather Underground was a radical group who were known to bomb buildings, etc. Yes, Bill Ayers was an active member of the group. But the fact is that he turned himself in in 1980 and was cleared of all charges. He is currently a respected professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and just happens to live in Hyde Park, the same neighborhood as Barack. Bill Ayers has been an activist in reworking education and teaching standards, and has had not crossed the line again. To say that Barack has ‘ties’ to terrorists because of Bill Ayers is ridiculous. I have friends who are conservative and I do not agree with conservative ideals, but that does not make me a conservative, and I am sure you would agree with me that it does not mean I have bad judgment. I know it isn’t the same thing, but a person’s acquaintances has no bearing on that person, whatsoever.

kevbo's avatar

PnL, can you provide your sources, anyway? I hear they’re all pedos at the top. Google “royal butler pedophile ring” and tell me the royal fam didn’t know about it, much less participate.

googlybear's avatar

Only 30 more days of this junk….

sndfreQ's avatar

stops following

nighty night

Les's avatar

But Snopes says the claim is false.

googlybear's avatar

And what does it say the status is? FALSE…opposite of TRUE?

googlybear's avatar

If you’re going to make something up….don’t post something that contradicts your false “facts”....

fireside's avatar

This issue was resolved by Reuters in the video referenced here

——

lol, there’s 11 people watching and waiting for you two critter and dale.
one of you has to go first.

critter1982's avatar

Did you read the article? Yes it said it was false that he is a radical muslim, but throughout his life he has been involved with people and radical muslim groups. I doubt that he himself is a radical muslim but with a connection and growing up in a radical muslim school I suppose my thought process is that I can’t be a 100% sure.

critter1982's avatar

@fireside: It wasn’t resolved. The video mentions that Obama denies it and that was the end of the story.

Les's avatar

@critter. What you are citing is part of the article that was deemed ‘false’..

Again: RADICAL Muslim and Muslim are not the same things.

I think you are the one who is stirring the pot here. You asked for a liberal view, I gave it to you (as did others). We know what your view is (completely wrong, by the way), so let us answer, and let that be the end of it.

By the way, I’m not voting for McCain because he has long red hair.

critter1982's avatar

@fire: Point taken but the 21,000 deaths is a bit ridiculous lol.

googlybear's avatar

@critter: Find me a section in the snopes article where radical and Muslim are side by side which is not deemed false…...Just because 0.000000001% of Muslims are radical does not make all of them radical Muslims just like the 0.000000001% of Christians who are radicals and kill doctors at abortion clinics, etc…

Les's avatar

It makes me sad that there are still so many people out there who can’t distinguish between a ‘radical’ (insert religion) and someone who practices that religion. The world is full of kind, gentle, wonderful people who, by simple accident of birth were born into different cultures and religions than yours or mine. This fact does not make these people evil, or terrorists. A few of their numbers branched off and formed horrible sects, this is true. And these religions are just as upset and worried about this fact as you and I. But the fact that traveling through the world only a couple of weeks ago, my friend (a Hindu, by the way. Not even the religion in question.) was stopped at every point he could be stopped at and questioned until the TSA were sure he was up to no evil, made me incredibly sad for the future of this world and its people. It’s been said before, and I’ll say it again. Open your mind to the possibility that just because something is different, doesn’t make it wrong or bad.

critter1982's avatar

@Les: I have a muslim friend, actually from Iraq, her dad escaped about 15 years ago and is honestly one of the coolest people I know. I understand that every religion has some sort of radical branch. And I agree that, “The world is full of kind, gentle, wonderful people who, by simple accident of birth were born into different cultures and religions than yours or mine. This fact does not make these people evil, or terrorists.” Again my question was in no way speculating that Obama is or was a terrorist. I whole heartedly just wanted a feeling for how liberals felt about this situation.

Les's avatar

And we gave it to you.

Les out.

googlybear's avatar

@Les: well stated and thank you for saying it….from an American who is currently working in Qatar, a very devout Muslim country with lots of very friendly, nice people…..

augustlan's avatar

Just a bunch of bogus hoo-ha. We are not concerned, because there is nothing to be concerned about.

dalepetrie's avatar

I don’t believe Obama has ties to radical Muslims. I’m far from an uninformed voter and I’ve followed up on every single one of the news stories, emails, etc. that makes claims like this. There are only 3 things that I’ve found that are substantiated:

Obama’s father was born a Muslim. Now of course he became an atheist before Obama was born, disappeared from Obama’s life before he remembers anything about him, and only spent 2 weeks with his father when he was I think 11 years old.

Second, Obama did go to school for I believe 2 years in Indonesia, and he did one year attend a Muslim school and another a Christian school, because his mother wanted him to be exposed to different religious concepts. The school was not, however (as Fox News claimed in one of their many smears against him) a Madrassa.

Third, Obama served on a board of director with William Ayers. Ayers, an American, was a member of the 1960s radical Weather Underground which committed acts of terror by setting off bombs…and he claimed later his only regret was that he didn’t set off more bombs. However, since these days, anyone in Chicago’s inner workings will tell you that Ayers has become a respected educator and is no longer associated with radical criminal elements. Furthermore, Obama was I believe 7 or 8 years old when Ayers was active in this organization, and Obama’s association with him was limited to a few days where they served on the same Board of Directors if I remember correctly. And my opinion is that if each of us was judged by the actions, no matter how long ago they occurred, of the people with whom we have even the smallest associations, not a single one of us would be considered beyond reproach.

So as a liberal, my opinion isn’t that I don’t care…it’s not like I’d be “willing to give somebody with “potentially” significant ties to more than a few radicals, a chance to run for the White House no matter where his “ideologies” stand.”

#1 – I AGREE with his ideology.
#2 – Whenever I hear something I would not like if it were true, I want to know if it is true, or if it isn’t what the truth really is, and where the distortion lies.

I have done this with all of these rumors, and to be honest, I’m just disgusted…I realize that it’s scare tactics, pure and simple. What’s far more persuasive to me is when someone tries to argue that he shouldn’t have voted for FISA or the bailout, or some of his negative ads against McCain. I stay informed, do my research and know what I can and can not deal with. But not a single one of the supposed ties to “radicals” and/or “radical Muslims” holds up to the scrutiny of fact checking. All that’s left is “what if”?

To that I say, “what if John McCain is a child molester?” I don’t think he is, there is no evidence that he is, but it could be, and what if he is. Are Conservatives “willing to give somebody who “potentially” rapes children, a chance to run for the White House no matter where his “ideologies” stand?”

SquirrelEStuff's avatar

@dale

I wish more people on this site could answer like you. Let the facts do the talking and not bash anyone. GA

critter1982's avatar

@dale: I appreciate the response.

Bri_L's avatar

@ critter1982 – I appreciate the question in that it put the matter to rest for me.

Bri_L's avatar

this is another rather disturbing article about Obamas connection with ACORN

http://www.aina.org/news/20080529155204.htm%3C/p%3E

This is kinda freaky. How could this go unnoticed? Are they holding this until it would be to late to defend?

dalepetrie's avatar

Seriously, glad to do it. And I just don’t believe in attacking people, even though sometimes I really, really want to, because hey, I can do a much better job of getting my point across if I stick to the facts and calmly state my opinions. Even still I offend at times, but I do try to avoid that. Some people will listen to what I have to say, some won’t listen no matter what, and you just have to accept that, but I know that those who are predisposed to being willing to listen are going to be turned off if I attack them and then any chance I had to make them understand my point of view is gone. I just realized, it’s actually not in my OWN self interest to be disagreeable, and if more people learned that lesson, what a great world this would be.

critter1982's avatar

@Bri: Interesting article. I need to finish reading it tomorrow. It’s getting late.

zenetha's avatar

@ critter. I personaly believe obama does have ties with radical thinkers… I don’t consider them terrorist. I would rather vote for him than John mccain for socio-economic reasons. At first when I researched his uncle “the terrorist” as some conservative articles portray him..I was concerned but then what does his uncle have to do with anything? Obamas not his uncle. He’s also not his radical friends in indonesia. If anything..he probably has a better view of things because of them. Change is what America needs. No one ever wonders why some hate America so much. Its because of the way America has treated other countries.

Bri_L's avatar

@critter1982— no prob. I am a fair side player.

I will say as of yet it has not changed my mind. I know there are levels of acquaintance and wrong that exist through out government.

If we only new.

AstroChuck's avatar

critter- Are you concerned that McCain had close ties to Charles Keating?
Worse still, what about Sarah Palin’s very close ties to a treasonist member of an Alaskan Independence organization named Todd Palin? Does that bother you?

Bri_L's avatar

I just watched a video on it:

http://keatingeconomics.com/

and read this article:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-brooks25–2008sep25,0,5467109.column

wow. Talk about the wrong guy for our economy

I also found this info out on his other “terrorist” connection.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/corsis_dull_hatchet.html

“When moderator George Stephanopoulos asked Obama about Ayers, the senator said he is “a guy who lives in my neighborhood… who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.”

Obama continued “and the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values, doesn’t make much sense, George. ”

The rest of the article attests to it being a stretch to connect him. It would be like connecting myself to chris6137 up above because our posts are in the same thread sometimes.

Obama was Eight when it happened. never the less, it would seem your beef is with Ayers. Are you suggesting its ok to transfer that ire to Obama? Surely your not, and I wont call you surely.

critter1982's avatar

Yes it does bother me, although McCain was exonerated. Todd Palin being a member of the Alaskan Independence party does not.

La_chica_gomela's avatar

Adding to what Bri L said,
Yes, Obama was EIGHT, not to mention the fact that ALL the charges against Ayers were DROPPED, and he’s now a professor at the University of Illinois. If he’s such a dangererous HORRIBLE terrorist why are we allowing him to be a professor and “infect” the minds of our nation’s youth?

Bri_L's avatar

I guess I look at the evidence McCaine tried to use on Obama in say, teaching kindergardeners about sex (when it was about stranger danger) and compare that to what McCaine was guilty of doing, in other words there are no doubts he did, I can’t believe he is not being questioned by his own followers.

He may have been exonerated but there was something stinky there.

La_chica_gomela's avatar

Bri L, I don’t understand your reference to teaching kindergarteners about sex…
error: does not compute…
does not compute…

Bri_L's avatar

I will find the link.

Obama signed a bill about sex education that addressed teaching kindergardeners about stranger danger. McCaine claims he wanted to teach them about wink wink shaboink sex.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/off_base_on_sex_ed.html

my point was if McCain can try to paint Obama with such weak info as this and not repent ( http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2008/10/dont-question-me.html third transcript)

then exonerated or not he was guilty of something by his own standards at least.

dalepetrie's avatar

One thing I would like to address, because the Ayers thing is sucking up all the wind in this room, is the ACORN article critter brought up.

In this article by Michelle Malkin, a conservative columnist and blogger who considers comparisons to Ann Coulter to be a compliment, we see an extremely biased, and seemingly one sided and not very well informed opinion about ACORN. She is one of the most anti-immigrant commentators out there, and has actually advocated deporting American born children of illegal immigrants (who have never been to the country of origin of their parent), using the vile term “anchor babies” to describe these innocent children. She has even served as fill in host for Bill O’Reilly on Fox News. So, one might question her impartiality in such matters, especially when she turns her vitriol in this article to the issue of ACORN helping illegal immigrants get houses.

What Malkin does do in this article is launch a full blown attack on what is essentially a non profit organization dedicated to helping people of lower and middle incomes obtain financial equality. What she does not do is back up her claims with any sort of facts. For example in the second sentence of her tirade, she states, “This left-wing group takes in 40 percent of its revenues from American taxpayers ”. However, when I looked into it, I found that ACORN, in order to attain independence, does not accept government funding and is NOT tax exempt. You can find the disclaimer on their own website, and several places on the internet will corroborate this. Nothing like leading off your assault with a full blown lie. And yet, I don’t find any source for this claim…she just throws it out there and expect we will believe it. Right there, for me this would be enough to keep me from even reading the rest of the article if this were about satisfying my own curiousity. But I did indeed read the entire thing.

In fact, there have been a few instances where people who work for ACORN have submitted false voter registrations, and what Malkin has done is to find the most outrageous, ridiculous examples of when this has occurred and then make a statement that it is a systemic problem from within ACORN, when in actuality, it was the actions of 2 or 3 people in this state, 3 or 4 in another, and 7 in another, often times these people were simply padding their numbers to get paid more, not to try to skew registrations one way or another. These were actions of individuals and to say that this was ACORN’s policy is like saying that the US Postal Service encourages employees to “go postal” and shoot a bunch of people. Furthermore, providing false registration is not right, but it is also not the same as voting…no one ever exactly showed up with a fake ID with the name “Jive Turkey” and expected to vote with it after all. And then for dramatic effect she mentions lawsuits in 12 states, but really only a small handful of individuals was ever convicted of any wrongdoing, and they were acting in their own self interests, and not under the guidance of ACORN directives.

Malkin tries desperately to impugn Obama’s independence because he worked with them as a community organizer (something she had to disparage, just like the mean spirited speeches at the RNC where they made fun of community organizing) by putting quotes around the phrase…that alone should tip you off to the vitriol and contempt she feels towards anyone who tries to help the less fortunate. And yes, for the first time in their history (because they require 75% of their membership to agree), they have endorsed a Presidential candidate…Obama. But one can not expect that a person is just going to turn the other way if you endorse them and then you do something bad…she just makes that assumption.

Then she really goes off the deep end and tries to say that because they have a relationship with HUD and AARP, that this is how the money has been funnelled from the government and through them, and that these organizations are satellites of the left wing of the Democratic party. This is about the time I begin to wonder who exactly designed her tinfoil hat.

Then she references not a credible news source, but an essay (i.e. opinion piece) written by the “Consumer Rights League”, an very shadowy organization about which little is known (not even who created or finance it), which it has been suggested is little more than a front for the credit card company lobbyists. And of course in the end, she impugns Obama as being part of the dirty politics of the Chicago machine (just something she threw out there with no examples, mind you).

In actuality, you know what ACORN is? Do you know what they do? Well, my research indicates that ACORN is who you call if it’s 20 below outside and the power company is about to turn off your electricity because you can’t pay your bill, or your landlord is about to kick you out on the street.

ACORN brought a class action lawsuit against predatory lenders (before our President apparently even realized it was causing a problem), in 2002 to create a $72 million Foreclosure Avoidance Program to keep people from losing their homes becaus of these practices.

ACORN has helped pass local living wage laws in fifteen cities nationwide.

ACORN’s Home Cleanout Demonstration Program gutted and rebuilt over 1,850 homes in the wake of hurricane Katrina. They helped displaced voters get to the polls during elections. They helped more than 2,000 homeowners in one way or another after the hurricane.

ACORN has worked to get mone money for schools, textbooks, teachers, etc.

ACORN was formed in 1970 to help welfare recipients attain their basic needs such as clothing and furniture. They’ve helped institute free lunches, helped the unempployed, helped with veterancs rights, helped farmers work in environmentally friendly ways.

ACORN has been at the forefront of trying to get the government to focus on Domestic issues instead of foreign issues.

ACORN has fought banking deregulation.

ACORN has helped people move into rehabilitated houses all over the country.

ACORN has been active in registering voters, including helping pass the Motor Voter bill which allowed people to register to vote when getting their driver’s license.

ACORN has fought against redlining in the insurance industry.

And for its efforts, ACORN has become a high profile target of the right wing of American politics, who consider their actions to bring about economic and social justice to be institutionalized welfare, and as we know the trickle down economic system we’ve been living under since the days of Reagan is very much at odds with helping people, because of course anyone who needs help is just a lazy person sucking off the government teat and refusing to take “personal responsibility™”.

So, basically if you like trickle down economics, if you think people should help themselves and we shouldn’t have privately financed organizations to help out those less fortunate, then by all means, demonize this charitable organization for the acts of a small handfull of people who have worked for them over the past nearly 40 years, don’t even bother to mention the good work they’ve done, and tie guilt by association to Obama because they support his candidacy.

But in my book, we need more ACORNS, not less and it’s an incredible stretch to demonize Obama because he is supported by a community organizing group which has not had a 100% batting average when it comes to hiring.

La_chica_gomela's avatar

Bri L, thanks for the link! I hadn’t heard about that! It’s ridiculous!!!!

Bri_L's avatar

@ Dale YAY!!!

@ La Chica – No sweat!

augustlan's avatar

Dale, I think I’m falling in lurve with you! ACORN sounds like an organization I’d like to work with…off to find the website.

Bri_L's avatar

I don’t think that is right

dalepetrie's avatar

now it is, thanks for pointing that out…

augustlan's avatar

Thank you, gentlemen. I found the site yesterday, and emailed it to myself. I’m definitely interested!

dalepetrie's avatar

If it were to turn out that Obama were downplaying his level of association with Ayers (or even “lying” about it), and that Obama’s first political fundraiser was indeed thrown by Ayers himself, is there anyone here who would change his vote?

I would not, and I’ll tell you why.

Because Ayers’ association with Weather Underground happened when Barack Obama was 8 years old.

Bill Ayers is now a respected member of the Chicago community. Any person who did the kind of work Obama did in Chicago in the field of community organizing and improving education would have encountered Bill Ayers and would have worked with him. And I personally would hate to be judged by the actions of everyone I’ve ever worked with, because I’ve worked with some real pricks.

To me, it’s a pretty big stretch to say that Ayers has remained this underground radical all these years and this whole charitable thing he’s been doing for most of his adult life is just a ruse, and now that Obama has come along, he suddently has this fellow radical Manchurian Candidate he can funnel all his hostilities through. I distrust the government and politicians as a general rule, but I also tend to think that when it sounds like the plot of a James Bond movie, it might be time to take a deep breath and really think about it.

On the plausibility scale, I just don’t see someone who’s made the decisions Obama has made in life (particularly shunning Wall Street jobs w/ 6 figure salaries for a $13k a year community organizing job) being this “radical” that people are afraid of (or should be). Right there, I think the conduct of his life makes the conspiracy theories about his “other” motives patently ridiculous in my personal opinion.

But even if you want to characterize Obama’s statements about Ayers as lies, I guess in my book, if someone’s attacking me about something I find patently ridiculous and I knew if any 100% true answer I could give would be twisted to make it seem like I was a dangerous terrorist, then I might “lie” too. I’d however be able to sleep at night if I told that lie, whereas if I took my opponent’s efforts to teach kindergarteners the difference between good touch and bad touch and told the American people that he wanted to teach comprehensive sex ed to kindergarteners, that lie just might make me want to black out all the mirrors in my house so I wouldn’t have to look at my lying self.

I would also like to point out, in conclusion, that if you can find someone wiling to run for President who is unwilling to lie or even stretch the truth, by all means, I’ll be happy to vote for a person like that.

critter1982's avatar

@dale: This is the way I believe that some people who are sitting on the fence are looking at this particular issue. If in fact Obama is lying about his connections with Ayers (whether he is doing it to hide something (which I doubt), or he is doing it so to not give voters a reason to not vote for him because of an insignificant connection), voters will have a problem believing him. ie. lowering taxes. I don’t feel this way, but I have talked with people who do not yet know who they are voting for (only a few people so this isn’t a scientific poll or anything) and they have a hard time trusting him, because he doesn’t have a long record and people don’t truly know what he stands for other than what he is telling people in interviews and debates.

La_chica_gomela's avatar

Critter, I’m sorry, but I don’t understand what your point is, what you’re getting at. ...

AstroChuck's avatar

critter- Just some friendly advice. Learn to use a period.

critter1982's avatar

Reference Dales thread. He asked, “If it were to turn out that Obama were downplaying his level of association with Ayers (or even “lying” about it), and that Obama’s first political fundraiser was indeed thrown by Ayers himself, is there anyone here who would change his vote?”

My point was regarding that question. Dale had mentioned previously (may or may not be in this thread, I’m not reading all of Dales comments over again, that would take awhile) that it is not really these character issues that help people choose their candidate. My point was that for people sitting on the fence in all actuality it could be those issues that push a person to believe one candidate or trust one candidate over another.

critter1982's avatar

lol thanks astro. I tend to sometimes write like I talk. I have been working on that though.

dalepetrie's avatar

I think character issues are fine to judge a person by. My problem though is I believe, and this is my opinion…no one HAS to agree with me, that a content of a man’s character can be judged best by his own actions. For me the idea of guilt by association is rather distasteful, because essentially it plays upon the worst fears of the ignorant. Not everyone is all that critical in looking at information, you tell the unwashed masses that someone is friends with someone who did something bad, and there’s a segment of them who will automatically think that other person is bad (even if that other person is Mother Frickin’ Theresa). I completely believe there are people who will take this Ayers thing and not really see the whole picture, and THAT’s the problem…that’s what McCain is counting on, that people will just buy this whole ruse hook, line and sinker. Ashame however that he can’t win by building himself up, so he feels the need to tear his opponent down, even if the criteria he’s using requires a bit of verbal and intellectual sleight of hand. Yes, when someone is a new commodity, people are going to be suspicious, and should be, but when you look at the big picture, what people are being fooled into worrying about is simply not all that plausible, and yet the people who go around saying, ‘don’t vote for Obama, because of Bill Ayers’ are people who wouldn’t vote for Obama anyway, for real, substantive reasons. I just wish we could raise the level of debate to where we ask the candidates what they will do…not what they think about their opponent, just tell us what specifically you plan to do and how you plan to do it. And if we don’t know you, tell us about yourself, give us your bio, bring up a few character references, and let people do a bit of digging. But have that digging done by an impartial source who will list out the facts of what they found, rather than put out their spin about it. That’s what I dream of. But I basically just responded to the Ayers thing as to why I personally think it’s a non issue to me, and why I doubt anyone on this board would change their minds because of it. Not saying no one would, but I’m saying if your mind is changed by this and this alone, and there’s really not anything just as bad or worse that you’ve observed in McCain’s character, they you’re probably not all that critical of a voter…you’re likely one of those who just votes based on gut instinct and that’s good enough for you. Such is Democracy, but it does mean that the least ethical have the biggest chance to exploit the system!

gailcalled's avatar

@dale ^^; If you put some breaks in, I promise that I will read that answer.

SquirrelEStuff's avatar

@dale

RON PAUL!

dalepetrie's avatar

can’t do it Chris. He wants to push too much to the state level. When you do that the states have to collect all the taxes, and they don’t tax income, they tax usage, which is the most regressive tax there is. The rich get even richer and the poor get screwed.

SquirrelEStuff's avatar

Im just responding to what u said about a politician telling the truth.

dalepetrie's avatar

Ahh, I get you! I’ll just have to settle for one who tells the truth when it counts.

dalepetrie's avatar

Oh SNAP, kevbo. I did NOT know that, lurve to you!

dalepetrie's avatar

And for anyone who’s interested in the so-called ACORN fraud allegations, a couple clicks into the link kevbo provided brings you here:

http://www.acorn.org/index.php?id=12439&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=22383&tx_ttnews[backPid]=12387&cHash=41ba018b65

If you have ANY concerns whatsoever about ACORN, I URGE you to read this, it tells the real story.

fireside's avatar

very good find.

augustlan's avatar

Yep…that story/video just broke this morning! Here is a link to the video. Do note, however, that it is not an Acorn meeting, but Acorn was a sponsor of the event.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther