I guess I don't get all of the vitriol surround either the Ayers or Keating connections. In both cases we are talking about people who faced judgment after doing what they believed in. Ayers turned himself in to police and the charges were dropped for McCain. Obama befriended Ayers years afterward while they were working together on school reform initiatives within their community while McCain and Keating were close personal friends for years before the whole savings and loan scandal blew up. I think that people just read too much into these relationships.
I would agree with you that the candidates character and judgement is important. I also don't give a damn about defending Obama from anything he has done. What bothers me is people condemning a man for what they are led to believe he may have done. Too many people are trying to connect the dots in the way that they *want* to see them connected rather than the way that they actually line up. It brings the level of discourse down for everyone involved.You say that McCain didn't know of Keating's activities, but that Obama "had to know" of Ayers past. Who are you to say what either one of them did or did not know? What we do know is that McCain's time with Keating was spent as Keating was working his way towards a federal prison, and that Obama's time with Ayers was spent during a point where Ayers had acheived some measure of respect in his community by members of both major political parties. I am not saying that I'm ok with the man's past, but I don't see anything that points to Obama approving of Ayers past or supporting those activities (when he was a child) much less anything that justifies calling Obama a terrorist. The point is, the Ayers link has been looked at and the most anyone was able to find was a casual working connection with a person that has a dirty past. Why does this matter more than McCain's known connections with a (then) soon-to-be-felon?I don't even care about McCain's connection to Keating that much, but it is much more solidly documented than anything about Obama and Ayers. Going by your standards, if I currently work with a person who committed a murder 20 years ago, I am just as guilty of the crime. That's ludicrous.You mention that Obama "sat in a vitriolicly anti-American church for two decades." Based on what? One video that may have taken place when Obama wasn't even there? You make it sound as though Rev. Wright stood up there every Sunday for 20 years saying "God Damn America" when I'm sure you have to realize that almost certainly wasn't the case. Still, we have plenty of examples of McCain or Palin witnessing equally idiotic behavior and not saying a word. Some of them quite recently. Why does it matter in Obama's case but not McCain's?Character does matter. Character assassination is a different matter entirely though. The problem for McCain is that they are relying on such tactics now, and for every attack he comes up with, there is usually a bigger skeleton in his own closet (or Palin's) to match it. They have gone so far as to even *announce* that this is what they feel they must do to win the race. What they are doing is bringing up any straw they can grasp at and trying to convince people that there's a lot more to the story than there really is. It's not that I "won't accept" their stories, it's that I don't see the connection they want me to believe in. Especially not after they just told us that they are going to start throwing a lot of mud in the hope that something sticks. I don't want to play some stupid game of "gotcha" over various associations or statements, I want to hear about policy decisions, but this is the tactic McCain has chosen.Here's another BIG problem with this tactic: One of these guys is going to be president come January. If it's McCain it will be because of his smears against Obama since they've admitted this is their last best chance. McCain isn't even trying to talk about actual issues so much anymore, which is a pity. It certainly doesn't put any pressure on Obama to come up with better policies. It drags down the entire process and makes us all a bit dumber, but he's ok with it if it gets him the White House. If Obama wins, he will have to lead a nation where a good many people have been convinced he is the anti-christ, a terrorist, or whatever else McCain can come up with in the next month. We'll have to face tough times with a president that many people have been conditioned to hate for no purpose except that McCain wants to be president. Creating that situation is about the exact opposite of putting country first, but McCain's ok with that also.Character does matter. I don't think that currently works in McCain's favor though.
They did not have to sell them house they could not afford, they need to sell them houses.... there is a difference.... they did not need to sell 1.5 mil houses to a store clerk.... the mortgage brokers ran free and made their coms.... no one was watching. the made the profit, we just bought the risk - I want that type of investment!
"I would agree with you that the candidates character and judgment is important."If that's true then it boggles the mind that you'd not see that, at the very least, Obama's judgment, if not character, was very, very poor. "You say that McCain didn't know of Keating's activities, but that Obama "had to know" of Ayers past. Who are you to say what either one of them did or did not know?"Because Ayers' activities were a matter of public record and common knowledge, and during McCain's association with Keating, his activities weren't. Ayers was on display in a photograph that appeared in Chicago Magazine, for instance, desecrating an American flag."Ayers had achieved some measure of respect in his community by members of both major political parties. I am not saying that I'm ok with the man's past, but I don't see anything that points to Obama approving of Ayers past or supporting those activities (when he was a child) much less anything that justifies calling Obama a terrorist."First of all, I never called Obama a terrorist, nor do I think he is, or ever was. Chicago politics is dominated by Democrats, but if he was given "some measure of respect" by any Republicans, he shouldn't have been, and they were wrong as well. The Univ. of Chicago should be ashamed too, for hiring this guy. He's an admitted terrorist, for God's sake."You mention that Obama "sat in a vitriolically anti-American church for two decades." Based on what? One video that may have taken place when Obama wasn't even there?"It wasn't just "one video." There are numerous clips of Wright's diatribes, and the Church also gave awards to the racist bigot Louis Farrakhan. Wright's press conference confirmed, with the whole world watching, what kind of views he held as well. And just look at Obama's shifting positions on the matter as the story developed (paraphrasing):1) What he said wasn't all that bad.2) OK, it's somewhat bad, but I could never disown him, just like I couldn't disown the black community.3) It's bad, get the hell away from me Rev. Wright.What bothers me the most about this affair is, even if one assumes Barrack didn't believe this crap, he regularly took his two beautiful daughters with him to this den of hate. As far as your Palin analogy, there's a difference between "idiocy" and venomous anti-American, hate whitey sermons. This guy married Michelle and Barack & baptized their children, too."Character does matter. Character assassination is a different matter entirely though. The problem for McCain is that they are relying on such tactics now, and for every attack he comes up with, there is usually a bigger skeleton in his own closet (or Palin's) to match it."I've tried to be objective, but I just don't see that. True, no one's perfect, but there's a real pattern of corrupt and questionable associations with Senator Obama that I feel every American ought to be concerned with. I'm not name-calling here, but these are questions that go to his judgment, and they don't look good. Now, it appears, his ties to ACORN were a lot closer that people first imagined too...and there are allegations of widespread voter fraud, as well as their role in the economic meltdown."McCain isn't even trying to talk about actual issues so much anymore, which is a pity... .If Obama wins, he will have to lead a nation where a good many people have been convinced he is the anti-christ, a terrorist, or whatever else McCain can come up with in the next month."I hear the left putting that forth, but I watched one of his campaign speeches yesterday, and 75% of it, at least, WAS dedicated to the issues of the day. As far as what many Americans will think of Obama if he's elected, I see your point here, but I still feel that as someone who's seeking the highest office in the land, these things are legitimate issues, and should be raised. If he's elected, I, for one, will strive to give him the benefit of the doubt and the respect that a President deserves by virtue of holding that office."Character does matter. I don't think that currently works in McCain's favor though."I agree that it matters, but I disagree strongly that it doesn't work in McCain's favor. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on that.To be quite honest, John McCain wasn't my first pick, and I have problems with him, too, but I do see him as by far the lesser of two evils. I wish that there were no merit to any of these ties to Obama, and if there weren't, I'd probably be inclined to support him. I do appreciate the civil discourse... That's in short supply here on digg.
Maybe Digg users just like facts. And reason. You know, logical arguments. Why is it that when the conservative propaganda is shown for what it is, the only retort is saying something inflammatory about liberals. I guess facts just have a liberal bias.
memitimOct 8, 2008
I guess I don't get all of the vitriol surround either the Ayers or Keating connections. In both cases we are talking about people who faced judgment after doing what they believed in. Ayers turned himself in to police and the charges were dropped for McCain. Obama befriended Ayers years afterward while they were working together on school reform initiatives within their community while McCain and Keating were close personal friends for years before the whole savings and loan scandal blew up. I think that people just read too much into these relationships.
origamironinOct 10, 2008
I would agree with you that the candidates character and judgement is important. I also don't give a damn about defending Obama from anything he has done. What bothers me is people condemning a man for what they are led to believe he may have done. Too many people are trying to connect the dots in the way that they *want* to see them connected rather than the way that they actually line up. It brings the level of discourse down for everyone involved.You say that McCain didn't know of Keating's activities, but that Obama "had to know" of Ayers past. Who are you to say what either one of them did or did not know? What we do know is that McCain's time with Keating was spent as Keating was working his way towards a federal prison, and that Obama's time with Ayers was spent during a point where Ayers had acheived some measure of respect in his community by members of both major political parties. I am not saying that I'm ok with the man's past, but I don't see anything that points to Obama approving of Ayers past or supporting those activities (when he was a child) much less anything that justifies calling Obama a terrorist. The point is, the Ayers link has been looked at and the most anyone was able to find was a casual working connection with a person that has a dirty past. Why does this matter more than McCain's known connections with a (then) soon-to-be-felon?I don't even care about McCain's connection to Keating that much, but it is much more solidly documented than anything about Obama and Ayers. Going by your standards, if I currently work with a person who committed a murder 20 years ago, I am just as guilty of the crime. That's ludicrous.You mention that Obama "sat in a vitriolicly anti-American church for two decades." Based on what? One video that may have taken place when Obama wasn't even there? You make it sound as though Rev. Wright stood up there every Sunday for 20 years saying "God Damn America" when I'm sure you have to realize that almost certainly wasn't the case. Still, we have plenty of examples of McCain or Palin witnessing equally idiotic behavior and not saying a word. Some of them quite recently. Why does it matter in Obama's case but not McCain's?Character does matter. Character assassination is a different matter entirely though. The problem for McCain is that they are relying on such tactics now, and for every attack he comes up with, there is usually a bigger skeleton in his own closet (or Palin's) to match it. They have gone so far as to even *announce* that this is what they feel they must do to win the race. What they are doing is bringing up any straw they can grasp at and trying to convince people that there's a lot more to the story than there really is. It's not that I "won't accept" their stories, it's that I don't see the connection they want me to believe in. Especially not after they just told us that they are going to start throwing a lot of mud in the hope that something sticks. I don't want to play some stupid game of "gotcha" over various associations or statements, I want to hear about policy decisions, but this is the tactic McCain has chosen.Here's another BIG problem with this tactic: One of these guys is going to be president come January. If it's McCain it will be because of his smears against Obama since they've admitted this is their last best chance. McCain isn't even trying to talk about actual issues so much anymore, which is a pity. It certainly doesn't put any pressure on Obama to come up with better policies. It drags down the entire process and makes us all a bit dumber, but he's ok with it if it gets him the White House. If Obama wins, he will have to lead a nation where a good many people have been convinced he is the anti-christ, a terrorist, or whatever else McCain can come up with in the next month. We'll have to face tough times with a president that many people have been conditioned to hate for no purpose except that McCain wants to be president. Creating that situation is about the exact opposite of putting country first, but McCain's ok with that also.Character does matter. I don't think that currently works in McCain's favor though.
killmonOct 10, 2008
They did not have to sell them house they could not afford, they need to sell them houses.... there is a difference.... they did not need to sell 1.5 mil houses to a store clerk.... the mortgage brokers ran free and made their coms.... no one was watching. the made the profit, we just bought the risk - I want that type of investment!
yesyoucantOct 10, 2008
"I would agree with you that the candidates character and judgment is important."If that's true then it boggles the mind that you'd not see that, at the very least, Obama's judgment, if not character, was very, very poor. "You say that McCain didn't know of Keating's activities, but that Obama "had to know" of Ayers past. Who are you to say what either one of them did or did not know?"Because Ayers' activities were a matter of public record and common knowledge, and during McCain's association with Keating, his activities weren't. Ayers was on display in a photograph that appeared in Chicago Magazine, for instance, desecrating an American flag."Ayers had achieved some measure of respect in his community by members of both major political parties. I am not saying that I'm ok with the man's past, but I don't see anything that points to Obama approving of Ayers past or supporting those activities (when he was a child) much less anything that justifies calling Obama a terrorist."First of all, I never called Obama a terrorist, nor do I think he is, or ever was. Chicago politics is dominated by Democrats, but if he was given "some measure of respect" by any Republicans, he shouldn't have been, and they were wrong as well. The Univ. of Chicago should be ashamed too, for hiring this guy. He's an admitted terrorist, for God's sake."You mention that Obama "sat in a vitriolically anti-American church for two decades." Based on what? One video that may have taken place when Obama wasn't even there?"It wasn't just "one video." There are numerous clips of Wright's diatribes, and the Church also gave awards to the racist bigot Louis Farrakhan. Wright's press conference confirmed, with the whole world watching, what kind of views he held as well. And just look at Obama's shifting positions on the matter as the story developed (paraphrasing):1) What he said wasn't all that bad.2) OK, it's somewhat bad, but I could never disown him, just like I couldn't disown the black community.3) It's bad, get the hell away from me Rev. Wright.What bothers me the most about this affair is, even if one assumes Barrack didn't believe this crap, he regularly took his two beautiful daughters with him to this den of hate. As far as your Palin analogy, there's a difference between "idiocy" and venomous anti-American, hate whitey sermons. This guy married Michelle and Barack & baptized their children, too."Character does matter. Character assassination is a different matter entirely though. The problem for McCain is that they are relying on such tactics now, and for every attack he comes up with, there is usually a bigger skeleton in his own closet (or Palin's) to match it."I've tried to be objective, but I just don't see that. True, no one's perfect, but there's a real pattern of corrupt and questionable associations with Senator Obama that I feel every American ought to be concerned with. I'm not name-calling here, but these are questions that go to his judgment, and they don't look good. Now, it appears, his ties to ACORN were a lot closer that people first imagined too...and there are allegations of widespread voter fraud, as well as their role in the economic meltdown."McCain isn't even trying to talk about actual issues so much anymore, which is a pity... .If Obama wins, he will have to lead a nation where a good many people have been convinced he is the anti-christ, a terrorist, or whatever else McCain can come up with in the next month."I hear the left putting that forth, but I watched one of his campaign speeches yesterday, and 75% of it, at least, WAS dedicated to the issues of the day. As far as what many Americans will think of Obama if he's elected, I see your point here, but I still feel that as someone who's seeking the highest office in the land, these things are legitimate issues, and should be raised. If he's elected, I, for one, will strive to give him the benefit of the doubt and the respect that a President deserves by virtue of holding that office."Character does matter. I don't think that currently works in McCain's favor though."I agree that it matters, but I disagree strongly that it doesn't work in McCain's favor. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on that.To be quite honest, John McCain wasn't my first pick, and I have problems with him, too, but I do see him as by far the lesser of two evils. I wish that there were no merit to any of these ties to Obama, and if there weren't, I'd probably be inclined to support him. I do appreciate the civil discourse... That's in short supply here on digg.
piggles07Oct 15, 2008
Maybe Digg users just like facts. And reason. You know, logical arguments. Why is it that when the conservative propaganda is shown for what it is, the only retort is saying something inflammatory about liberals. I guess facts just have a liberal bias.