CNN Report: Proves Obama Lied About Ayers

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Beta84

like i said before, i've never heard of Ayers. I'm not as old as Obama, but can you tell me what happened in the world of current events when you were 8 years old? I don't think I can, and that wasn't even 20 years ago. Unless someone told him who Ayers was (which IS possible, I'm not saying it isn't), then you can't say he knew for sure.

Also curious -- if this guy did everything people say he did...how on EARTH is he not in prison right now? Is our justice system that terrible, or did the guy get off for his crimes? I'm just having a hard time understanding how someone who is accused of blowing up buildings and killing innocent people was still walking the streets and able to befriend Obama.

You see, this is indicative of how this whole thing has been portrayed. Because the Ayres terrorist attacks happened when Obama was 8 he couldn't possibly have known who Ayres was. Obama's association with Ayres began (I think) about 13 years ago. I'm quite certain of all the people Obama surrounded himself with someone had to tell him who Ayres was. Or did he surround himself with a bunch of dolts?

[itsbob (Premo)]

Originally Posted by SamSpade

If a renowned bigot endorses your campaign, does that make you a bigot? Same reasoning. People may hold position A, B, and C and espouse political philosophy D - but it doesn't mean the person they support and endorse coincides with all of those. I support McCain, but there's a TON of stuff we disagree on, and I'm mainly voting for him against Obama.

If Hamas endorses Obama, does that make him a terrorist - or does it just mean they formed an opinion, based on who's available? Does that mean his agenda coincides with theirs, or that he is more likely to allow them to advance their own without interference? It doesn't mean anything.

I personally think Pat Robertson has always, always been nuttier than a fruitcake, but I certainly wouldn't consider an endorsement by him to indicate that his candidate is on the same page with him.

None of those other people or groups you mentioned made it their lifes work to overthrow our government, or even planned and esecuted attacks on our country for the sole purpose of overthrowing our government trying to force our government into socialism or communism.

Why would Ayers support ANY politician in our government in it's current form if he's willing to kill people to change it? Doesn't make sense...

That would be like blowing up Abortion Clinics today, but sending $10,000 to support Planned Parenthood tomorrow.


NONE of the above people YOU mentioned are going to support, spend money on, or invite to their lviving room, ANY candidate that doesn't support some or part of their idealogy. Neither would you I bet.

It would be as ludicrous as David Duke supporting Jesse Jackson in his run for the White House.

[itsbob (Premo)]

Originally Posted by SamSpade

If a renowned bigot endorses your campaign, does that make you a bigot? Same reasoning. People may hold position A, B, and C and espouse political philosophy D - but it doesn't mean the person they support and endorse coincides with all of those. I support McCain, but there's a TON of stuff we disagree on, and I'm mainly voting for him against Obama.

If Hamas endorses Obama, does that make him a terrorist - or does it just mean they formed an opinion, based on who's available? Does that mean his agenda coincides with theirs, or that he is more likely to allow them to advance their own without interference? It doesn't mean anything.

I personally think Pat Robertson has always, always been nuttier than a fruitcake, but I certainly wouldn't consider an endorsement by him to indicate that his candidate is on the same page with him.

And again, you're looking at it in the wrong perspective.

Hamas supporting a candidate of course doesn't make him a terrorist.. But WHY would they support ANY candidate?

If Osama Bin Laden came out and endorsed and sent a campaign $200,000 I'd have to question WHY!?? What does he know about this candidate that I don't??

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by SamSpade

If Hamas endorses Obama, does that make him a terrorist - or does it just mean they formed an opinion, based on who's available? Does that mean his agenda coincides with theirs, or that he is more likely to allow them to advance their own without interference? It doesn't mean anything.

It’s easy to conclude that if Hamas endorses Obama they see his philosophy as sympathetic to their cause. That isn’t just a figment of their imagination. These people pay attention to our politics. Will this result in a furthering of Hamas’ agenda? That remains to be seen, but when you hear Obama stating he would sit down with terrorist nations without preconditions (no matter how YOU interpret this), Hamas reads this as an advantage.

Originally Posted by SamSpade

I personally think Pat Robertson has always, always been nuttier than a fruitcake, but I certainly wouldn't consider an endorsement by him to indicate that his candidate is on the same page with him.

You're comparing Pat Robertson to Hamas? He may be a nut but he does not have an agenda to eradicate an entire people and does not have a movement of violence.

[SamSpade]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

You're comparing Pat Robertson to Hamas?

I did no such thing. The premise is simple - an endorsement by a person does not equal any such regard in reverse. If a deranged lunatic thinks you'd be a fine candidate for mayor, it doesn't mean there's something wrong with you.

You may be in love with Jodie Foster enough to try to shoot a President, but it doesn't mean there's something wrong with Jodie. It doesn't mean she's got some quirk that attracts psychopaths.

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by SamSpade

I did no such thing. The premise is simple - an endorsement by a person does not equal any such regard in reverse. If a deranged lunatic thinks you'd be a fine candidate for mayor, it doesn't mean there's something wrong with you.

You may be in love with Jodie Foster enough to try to shoot a President, but it doesn't mean there's something wrong with Jodie. It doesn't mean she's got some quirk that attracts psychopaths.

An endorsement by a group means that they identify with that candidate's philosophy. Is that a comfortable situation to you? Does that comfort level stand par with a Robertson endorsement of McCain? Or do endorsements occur in a vacuum?

[SamSpade]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

An endorsement by a group means that they identify with that candidate's philosophy. Is that a comfortable situation to you? Does that comfort level stand par with a Robertson endorsement of McCain? Or do endorsements occur in a vacuum?

It means that if I run for county commissioner and the local KKK chapter endorses me, it doesn't make me a racist. It means if Charles Manson endorses Obama, it doesn't mean anything about Obama. For all we know, they're betting that their endorsement HURTS the person they endorse.

For all we know, they base their endorsement on a false perception. I know people who are voting for Obama because they think McCain will start a war with Russia. It may align with their agenda, but they may not be thinking right.

Now, if I meet with the KKK and embrace their endorsement - or if Obama meets with or otherwise approves the endorsement - that's different. It's only important if it goes both ways.

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by SamSpade

It means that if I run for county commissioner and the local KKK chapter endorses me, it doesn't make me a racist. It means if Charles Manson endorses Obama, it doesn't mean anything about Obama. For all we know, they're betting that their endorsement HURTS the person they endorse.

For all we know, they base their endorsement on a false perception. I know people who are voting for Obama because they think McCain will start a war with Russia. It may align with their agenda, but they may not be thinking right.

Now, if I meet with the KKK and embrace their endorsement - or if Obama meets with or otherwise approves the endorsement - that's different. It's only important if it goes both ways.

If the KKK endorsed you and you had a track record or being associated with racist groups then I would say that’s a problem. But since you don’t, it's nothing more than an endorsement which I’m sure you would reject.

Obama has a track record of being associated with groups holding radical ideals. Even though he denies it, he has a short upbringing in an Islamic school. His rhetoric towards countries like Syria and Iran has shown a certain sympathy towards them. He even had that Freudian slip “… you're absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith.” None of those things alone are indications of anything. Compiled as a whole shows a trend.

[tommyjones]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

If the KKK endorsed you and you had a track record or being associated with racist groups then I would say that’s a problem. But since you don’t, it's nothing more than an endorsement which I’m sure you would reject.

Obama has a track record of being associated with groups holding radical ideals. Even though he denies it, he has a short upbringing in an Islamic school. His rhetoric towards countries like Syria and Iran has shown a certain sympathy towards them. He even had that Freudian slip “… you're absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith.” None of those things alone are indications of anything. Compiled as a whole shows a trend.

wow, and to think i actually respected your opinions on this matter before.

you have just quoted 3 inaccuracies and tried to string them into some grand conspiracy.....

he never denied that he went to a muslim school
he has certainly clarified his position on meeting with the likes of syria and iran and it is completely in line with kissinger, as Obama stated in the last debate.
the slip you are representing certainly wasn't a fruedian one, but one of proximity. he was just asked about attacks questioning his religion and used a phase that could have been interpreted wrong, and it was immediately clairified.


I have no problem with people having legit issues with obama's policies. I agree some are effing wastes of money or unfair, but the three issues you just quoted are BS.

[chernmax (Premo)]

Originally Posted by tommyjones

wow, and to think i actually respected your opinions on this matter before.

you have just quoted 3 inaccuracies and tried to string them into some grand conspiracy.....

he never denied that he went to a muslim school
he has certainly clarified his position on meeting with the likes of syria and iran and it is completely in line with kissinger, as Obama stated in the last debate.
the slip you are representing certainly wasn't a fruedian one, but one of proximity. he was just asked about attacks questioning his religion and used a phase that could have been interpreted wrong, and it was immediately clairified.


I have no problem with people having legit issues with obama's policies. I agree some are effing wastes of money or unfair, but the three issues you just quoted are BS.

Kissinger: "I Do Not Agree With Barack Obama"