''I don't regret setting bombs" - Page 2

Scrum · 05-07-2008, 10:51 AM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

Yes Obama's political career was launched in Bill Ayer's home.

Care to back that up?

The event at Ayers house was a re-election campaign. He already held office.

kinggovernor · 05-07-2008, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by lew

Them holding slaves was not the means that they overthrew their tyranny and established the great society that they did.

slaves helped to establish the great society, so is that a yes or no?

kinggovernor · 05-07-2008, 10:59 AM

Originally Posted by Scrum

Care to back that up?

The event at Ayers house was a re-election campaign. He already held office.

In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district’s influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.
Obama once visited '60s radicals - Ben Smith - Politico.com

kinggovernor · 05-07-2008, 11:00 AM

Picture from the Chicago Magazine in 2001.

lew · 05-07-2008, 11:01 AM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

slaves helped to establish the great society, so is that a yes or no?

No, they didn't.

lew · 05-07-2008, 11:03 AM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

Picture from the Chicago Magazine in 2001.

zomg he is standing on top of a flag of a country that has slaughtered millions of people, started numerous wars, completely disregards its own laws, etc, etc

kinggovernor · 05-07-2008, 11:06 AM

Originally Posted by A_C_E

Your attempts to slander him and convince yourself that these stupid connections will stop his run to the White House are getting really old. You and those who share your political beliefs are doing everything you possibly can to marginalize his chances and cut him down with these PATHETIC attacks. It's disgusting.

what is pathetic about it? Should we not look into a candiate's background, to see what type of person they are and with whom they choose to associate with?

First, it was Rezko would stop him from winning. Then it was Rev. Wright. Now it's Ayers.

just wait for the general, Rev. Wright may be played out but Rezko and Ayers are not

Anyone who would be influenced by the News spin on these issues was already very predisposed not to vote for Obama anyway.

Give it up already.

Then why did Obama appear on Fox News Sunday just this last week?

kinggovernor · 05-07-2008, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by lew

No, they didn't.

the founding fathers said they were worth 3/5 of a white man, so they had to help into making the great society of America.

lew · 05-07-2008, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

the founding fathers said they were worth 3/5 of a white man, so they had to help into making the great society of America.

You're trolling.

Slavery had nothing to with the Revolutionary War and you know that.

"Terrorism" however, did.

Scrum · 05-07-2008, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district’s influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.
Obama once visited '60s radicals - Ben Smith - Politico.com

She brought him to their house to meet a few people and it launched his political career?
Is that the only place they visited or did they maybe visit a few different places to meet all the influential Democrats around town?

It's just silly the amount of spin this story is getting.

kinggovernor · 05-07-2008, 11:16 AM

Originally Posted by lew

You're trolling.

Slavery had nothing to with the Revolutionary War and you know that.

"Terrorism" however, did.

Lets back it then, you said you support domestic terrorists because that is what, in your mind, the founding fathers did.

So I asked you if you support slavery because many founding fathers participated in that too.

My point was to show that the founding fathers were not infallible and to say "well the founding fathers did this, so its ok" is bogus.

kinggovernor · 05-07-2008, 11:18 AM

Originally Posted by Scrum

She brought him to their house to meet a few people and it launched his political career?
Is that the only place they visited or did they maybe visit a few different places to meet all the influential Democrats around town?

It's just silly the amount of spin this story is getting.

they also worked together on several advisory boards.

The whole point of this is not to say that Obama is going to bomb the capitol or anything like that. But rather, show what his true political values are. Which are far left, much further left than Clinton. He has spun it well, saying that he intends to "transcend politics" but that is not the case.

lew · 05-07-2008, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

Lets back it then, you said you support domestic terrorists because that is what, in your mind, the founding fathers did.

So I asked you if you support slavery because many founding fathers participated in that too.

My point was to show that the founding fathers were not infallible and to say "well the founding fathers did this, so its ok" is bogus.

That is NOT what I said.

I said I don't have a problem with (some) aspects of domestic terrorism because the founding fathers engaged in such to liberate this country. In the same way, any modern "terrorist" group that tried to overthrow the government and liberate us, I could possibly support.

The Weathermen were Marxists so I greatly dislike that, but they were great with their critiques of the War Machine our government has become. Plus, they never harmed anyone, as they always gave advanced notice of when they were going to do a bombing and went to great length to not harm people.

kinggovernor · 05-07-2008, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by lew

That is NOT what I said.

I said I don't have a problem with (some) aspects of domestic terrorism because the founding fathers engaged in such to liberate this country. In the same way, any modern "terrorist" group that tried to overthrow the government and liberate us, I could possibly support.

The Weathermen were Marxists so I greatly dislike that, but they were great with their critiques of the War Machine our government has become. Plus, they never harmed anyone, as they always gave advanced notice of when they were going to do a bombing and went to great length to not harm people.

http://www.libertylounge.net/forums/...tml#post182957

That is what you said.

lew · 05-07-2008, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

http://www.libertylounge.net/forums/...tml#post182957

That is what you said.

aaaaaaaaaaaaand you're still trolling.

Yes, I said they were domestic terrorists. Which I then clarified a few posts later by saying that their terrorism helped liberate this country - slavery did not.

This wasn't an issue about something the founding fathers did or not did. It was about what the founding fathers did to liberate us.

kinggovernor · 05-07-2008, 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by lew

aaaaaaaaaaaaand you're still trolling.

Yes, I said they were domestic terrorists. Which I then clarified a few posts later by saying that their terrorism helped liberate this country - slavery did not.

This wasn't an issue about something the founding fathers did or not did. It was about what the founding fathers did to liberate us.

you came into a thread proclaiming your support for the weatherman, and who is calling who a troll?

anyways....back to Bill Ayers hurting Obama's chances to being elected.

David Octavius · 05-07-2008, 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

they also worked together on several advisory boards.

The whole point of this is not to say that Obama is going to bomb the capitol or anything like that. But rather, show what his true political values are. Which are far left, much further left than Clinton. He has spun it well, saying that he intends to "transcend politics" but that is not the case.

This thread hasn't proved anything, if David Duke donates $200 to McCain it doesn't make him a racist. Moreover, Obama did not have control of who was on the (it was ONE board) advisory board, he didn't form it, he was just appointed to it and it was a board on stopping POVERTY.

kinggovernor · 05-07-2008, 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by David Octavius

This thread hasn't proved anything, if David Duke donates $200 to McCain it doesn't make him a racist. Moreover, Obama did not have control of who was on the (it was ONE board) advisory board, he didn't form it, he was just appointed to it and it was a board on stopping POVERTY.

and if David Duke gave Hillary $200, it wouldn't make her a racist either.

In the years that followed, Obama and Ayers would serve together as (paid) board members of the Woods Fund, a leftist Chicago foundation, and appear jointly on academic panels, at least one of which was organized by Michelle Obama. Ayers would even donate money to one of Obama's political campaigns.

Arguably, none of this would matter if Ayers and Dohrn had long ago repudiated their violent extremism. But they have always refused to apologize for their monstrous behavior. "We weren't extreme enough in fighting against the war," Ayers told the Chicago Tribune in 2001. In a memoir published that year, he exulted: "Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon." America, he said after Sept. 11, "is not a just and fair and decent place. . . . It makes me want to puke."

Is this Obama's idea of "respectable" and "mainstream" political thinking? If so, doesn't that tell us something about his judgment and standards?

In Chicago the other day, radio producer Guy Benson discovered video recordings of Ayers and Dohrn speaking at a reunion of antiwar radicals in November 2007. To live in the United States, Dohrn told the group, is to be "inside the heart of the monster" that is such a "purveyor of violence in the world." Ayers denounced America as an imperial warmonger steeped in "jingoistic patriotism, unprecedented and unapologetic military expansion, white supremacy . . . attacks on women and girls, violent attacks, growing surveillance in every sphere of our lives, on and on and on."

Even if Obama doesn't personally believe these things, is it really "tired tripe" to ask why he seems so comfortable in the company of people who do? Is it really "extremely stupid politics" to wonder whether such people might play a role in an Obama administration? Rather than slam the few journalists who raise such questions, might it not behoove others in the media to follow suit?

Obama's 'mainstream' friends - The Boston Globe

It raises questions about Obama's values. Look at how he switched positions on Rev. Wright only after Wright went mainstream and then became too much of a liability.

lew · 05-07-2008, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

you came into a thread proclaiming your support for the weatherman, and who is calling who a troll?

anyways....back to Bill Ayers hurting Obama's chances to being elected.

Proclaiming support (which I didn't) for a group that barely did anything and harmed no one is not that big of a deal.

Further linking that group to Obama through a thousand degrees of separation is highly ridiculous.