Page 4 of 20 FirstFirst 12345678914 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 398
  1. #61  
    I take it you are aware that Obama launched his candidacy from the home of the terrorist (http://www.sherdog.net/forums/f54/ob...es-ad-836797/).

    Association - the people YOU hang out with. The people you court in order to further your agenda.

    Are you telling me you do not know of Ayres? Heck after 9-11 he said he had not done enough. Seriously, you gotta be joking. Another associate, his neighbor Tony Rezko. We know the stuff about McCain and you acknowledge it, but you do not acknowledge the same and really worse with Obama - especially the association with a known killer, bomber, terrorist, racist and other lovely things.

    I never said anything about Bush, cause it was never covered up with him. It has been addressed bunches of times; however with Obama, the press quickly dropped it.

    I would really like to read an in-depth study in the NY Times about Obama, one that covered it as well as they do when a Republican screws up. They are one-sided.

    I have never read Obama Nation and never heard of it until you mentioned it. I gotta read it - have you?

    Did Obama and Biden vote for the Highway to Nowhere? Did Biden make racial slurs about people from India (7-Eleven). Did Biden make racial slurs about taxi drivers (you fill in the blank).

    Now, is anything I mumbled about above not correct?

    Also, you lost, I did muster a response.

    ------------------------------------------------------


    I didn't think you could muster a response Ben.

    BTW - since we all know you've been reading entirely too much of Mr. Corsi's sleazy book, "Obama Nation", you can read here what factcheck.org had to say about the book and ironically, some of your ridiculous claims: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...l_hatchet.html[/QUOTE]
  2. #62  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    Barye, did you do any looking in to the 2005 Freddie stuff, such as http://beltwaysnark.com/2008/09/16/j...eddiein-2005/? Did you look to see who blocked it? What did Barney Frank have to do with it? Bunches of links just to Goggle with.

    Bayre, what like did he announce this weekend? I heard about 30 minutes of it.
    Maybe those voting against it didn't believe in bigger government, bail-out, and more regulation. Y'know, like McCain is saying now.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  3. #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    I take it you are aware that Obama launched his candidacy from the home of the terrorist (http://www.sherdog.net/forums/f54/ob...es-ad-836797/).

    Association - the people YOU hang out with. The people you court in order to further your agenda.
    Look up Keating Five.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_five

    These weren't just people that McCain associated with in passing, he was actively involved in their actions. Also, how about his association with George Bush and his policies?

    Also, can you muster a response to McCain's lies I posted? C'mon, take up the challenge!
    Last edited by Bujin; 09/17/2008 at 05:50 AM.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  4. #64  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    I take it you are aware that Obama launched his candidacy from the home of the terrorist (http://www.sherdog.net/forums/f54/obama-tries-silence-ayres-ad-836797/).
    The fact that you use this as a source is all that we need to know about how much foaming-at-the-mouth hatred you have for Dems and Obama. Sounds to me that even FOX would not run the ad mentioned in this forum - it was THAT sleazy - yet you post this link as though it lends some credence to your incredibly obtuse argument.

    Association - the people YOU hang out with. The people you court in order to further your agenda.
    Like the Keating 5?

    Are you telling me you do not know of Ayres? Heck after 9-11 he said he had not done enough. Seriously, you gotta be joking. Another associate, his neighbor Tony Rezko. We know the stuff about McCain and you acknowledge it, but you do not acknowledge the same and really worse with Obama - especially the association with a known killer, bomber, terrorist, racist and other lovely things.
    You're like a broken record Ben. But as usual, there is NOTHING of substance in what you write.

    I never said anything about Bush, cause it was never covered up with him. It has been addressed bunches of times; however with Obama, the press quickly dropped it.
    Have you taken your meds yet today? Your so filled with hate and lies that you can't even maintain a steady and rational stream of thought.

    I would really like to read an in-depth study in the NY Times about Obama, one that covered it as well as they do when a Republican screws up. They are one-sided.
    Go ahead and read it. Feel free to cite it so that we can read it too.

    I have never read Obama Nation and never heard of it until you mentioned it. I gotta read it - have you?

    Did Obama and Biden vote for the Highway to Nowhere? Did Biden make racial slurs about people from India (7-Eleven). Did Biden make racial slurs about taxi drivers (you fill in the blank).

    Now, is anything I mumbled about above not correct?
    Well...you got the mumbling right. But you've basically mumbled your same ole' list of half-truths and lies. But thanks for confirming your radical viewpoints for us all.


    Also, you lost, I did muster a response.
    I lost? LOL. Grow up Ben.
  5. #65  
    You post the Keating Five - however, did any of these people bomb sites within this country? Did any of these people kill others in this country? The Keating Five definitely do not fit the "terrorist" bill. They definitely do not fit the "racist" bill. There are people directly connected to Obama that do fit these terms.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Look up Keating Five.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_five

    These weren't just people that McCain associated with in passing, he was actively involved in their actions. Also, how about his association with George Bush and his policies?

    Also, can you muster a response to McCain's lies I posted? C'mon, take up the challenge!
  6. #66  
    Nothing of substance? You did read the statement Ayers made about possibly not doing enough. That is not substance?

    For links, same quality as yours most of the time.

    Hate and lies? Look closer. All I have done is to point out what you refuse to look at. Hate? Not at all, I dislike Obama's politics, not the man himself.

    When it comes to crude remarks, yours are much more frequent and show a higher degree of aggression. You do read like a broken record more than not.

    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    The fact that you use this as a source is all that we need to know about how much foaming-at-the-mouth hatred you have for Dems and Obama. Sounds to me that even FOX would not run the ad mentioned in this forum - it was THAT sleazy - yet you post this link as though it lends some credence to your incredibly obtuse argument.



    Like the Keating 5?



    You're like a broken record Ben. But as usual, there is NOTHING of substance in what you write.



    Have you taken your meds yet today? Your so filled with hate and lies that you can't even maintain a steady and rational stream of thought.



    Go ahead and read it. Feel free to cite it so that we can read it too.



    Well...you got the mumbling right. But you've basically mumbled your same ole' list of half-truths and lies. But thanks for confirming your radical viewpoints for us all.




    I lost? LOL. Grow up Ben.
  7. #67  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    Nothing of substance? You did read the statement Ayers made about possibly not doing enough. That is not substance?

    For links, same quality as yours most of the time.

    Hate and lies? Look closer. All I have done is to point out what you refuse to look at. Hate? Not at all, I dislike Obama's politics, not the man himself.

    When it comes to crude remarks, yours are much more frequent and show a higher degree of aggression. You do read like a broken record more than not.
    I've read plenty about Ayers and Obama's supposed big connection to him. I think this article offers a balanced look at this matter.
    Obama's 'Weatherman' Connection


    Chicago Police photos of William Ayers in 1968


    "William Ayers, in the age of terrorism, will be Barack Obama's Willie Horton."
    --Former counterterrorism official Larry C. Johnson, The Huffington Post, Feb. 16, 2008.
    There has been a sudden spate of blog items and newspaper articles, mainly in the British press, linking Barack Obama to a former member of the radical Weather Underground Organization that claimed responsibility for a dozen bombings between 1970 and 1974. The former Weatherman, William Ayers, now holds the position of distinguished professor of education at the University of Illinois-Chicago. Although never convicted of any crime, he told the New York Times in September 2001, "I don't regret setting bombs...I feel we didn't do enough."
    Both Obama and Ayers were members of the board of an anti-poverty group, the Woods Fund of Chicago, between 1999 and 2002. In addition, Ayers contributed $200 to Obama's re-election fund to the Illinois State Senate in April 2001, as reported here. They lived within a few blocks of each other in the trendy Hyde Park section of Chicago, and moved in the same liberal-progressive circles.
    Is there anything here that raises questions about Obama's judgment or is this just another example of guilt by association?
    The Facts

    The first article in the mainstream press linking Obama to Ayers appeared in the London Daily Mail on February 2. It was written by Peter Hitchens, the right-wing brother of the left-wing firebrand turned Iraq war supporter, Christopher Hitchens. Hitchens cited the Ayers connection to bolster his argument that Obama is "far more radical than he would like us to know."
    The Hitchens piece was followed by a Bloomberg article last week pointing to the Ayers connection as support for Hillary Clinton's contention that Obama might not be able to withstand the "Republican attack machine." Larry Johnson, a former counterterrorism official at the CIA and the State Department, predicted that the Republicans would seize on the Ayers case, and other Chicago relationships, to "bludgeon Obama's presidential aspirations into the dust."
    The London Sunday Times joined the chorus this weekend by reporting that Republicans were "out to crush Barack by painting him as a leftwinger with dubious support".
    The only hard facts that have come out so far are the $200 contribution by Ayers to the Obama re-election fund, and their joint membership of the eight-person Woods Fund Board. Ayers did not respond to e-mails and telephone calls requesting clarification of the relationship. Obama spokesman Bill Burton noted in a statement that Ayers was a professor of education at the University of Illinois and a former aide to Mayor Richard M. Daley, and continued:
    Senator Obama strongly condemns the violent actions of the Weathermen group, as he does all acts of violence. But he was an eight-year-old child when Ayers and the Weathermen were active, and any attempt to connect Obama with events of almost forty years ago is ridiculous.
    In the short term, the person who has most to gain by speculation about Obama's acquaintance with a former terrorist is Hillary Clinton. The former First Lady likes to present herself as "tested and vetted" after years of exposure to Republican attacks, in contrast to Obama, a relative newcomer to hardscrabble presidential politics. Such arguments resonate with Johnson, the counterterrorism expert, who told me that he is a Clinton supporter, although not involved with the campaign.
    But the Obama-Ayers link is a tenuous one. As Newsday pointed out, Clinton has her own, also tenuous, Weatherman connection. Her husband commuted the sentences of a couple of convicted Weather Underground members, Susan Rosenberg and Linda Sue Evans, shortly before leaving office in January 2001. Which is worse: pardoning a convicted terrorist or accepting a campaign contribution from a former Weatherman who was never convicted?
    Whatever his past, Ayers is now a respected member of the Chicago intelligentsia, and still a member of the Woods Fund Board. The president of the Woods Fund, Deborah Harrington, said he had been selected for the board because of his solid academic credentials and "passion for social justice."
    "This whole connection is a stretch," Harrington told me. "Barack was very well known in Chicago, and a highly respected legislator. It would be difficult to find people round here who never volunteered or contributed money to one of his campaigns."


    The Pinocchio Test

    The question is not whether a connection can be established between Barack Obama and a former member of the Weathermen, but whether it has any significance for the 2008 presidential campaign. Could Bill Ayers become a political embarrassment for Obama? Let me know what you think.
  8. #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    I've read plenty about Ayers and Obama's supposed big connection to him. I think this article offers a balanced look at this matter.
    The truth won't matter to ben... I've already posted stuff like this in the past.... he will look over it and keep on his agenda.

    His agenda is not the truth or politics. Don't be fooled... you are wasting your time.
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  9. #69  
    Moderateinny,

    You're assuming that presenting facts will have any effect. He is impervious to facts.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  10. #70  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Moderateinny,

    You're assuming that presenting facts will have any effect. He is impervious to facts.
    I haven't been around in a while so I have some catching up to do with Ben. Deep down inside I know he really missed me.
  11. #71  
    No, Theog, it is not a waste of time. When a politician launches his campaign at the residence of a terrorist, there is a connection that binds the 2. You ignore it here, but you do not ignore it with Keating 5. You are exhibiting a double standard and name calling is a bad defense of it.

    Obama can strongly condemn what the terrorist did, and I have not a problem with that. However, to associate with that kind of person places questions of judgment right in the open - if it were not, then why or why do so many people have a problem with it and why oh why is it still discussed and why or why do people like you continue to defend him? If it were ok, then Obama would not have a problem in convincing people that it is ok, 'cause he is the one who will bring us all together - you said that.

    You protest too much, an indication that even you have a problem with the double standard.
  12. #72  
    No, not impervious to facts, just impervious to the double standard you continue to uphold. Acknowledge those double standards and life becomes good.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Moderateinny,

    You're assuming that presenting facts will have any effect. He is impervious to facts.
  13. #73  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    No, not impervious to facts, just impervious to the double standard you continue to uphold. Acknowledge those double standards and life becomes good.
    This is not about double standards so much as it about lies. You're lying and using fear, uncertainty, and doubt to bully us all into thinking McSame is the guy we should be voting for and attacking Obama. But since McSame and Palin have been outed for being the liars (and sinners) that they are of late, I suppose somebody has to try and carry the torch.
  14. #74  
    Attacking Obama? No, just reminding that he is not the messiah and that we need to look as closely at him as we have at McCain. The press has been all over McCain/Palin while Obama/Biden has had the easy ride.

    You speak of liars and sinners? Wow, what about the abortion issue? What about infanticide? What about Nancy and her statements about abortion? The list is long on both sides, though you ignore them on the left side.
  15. #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    Attacking Obama? No, just reminding that he is not the messiah and that we need to look as closely at him as we have at McCain. The press has been all over McCain/Palin while Obama/Biden has had the easy ride.
    Not true. 72% of Obama's coverage in the press has been negative. Only 57% of McSame's has been negative.

    You speak of liars and sinners? Wow, what about the abortion issue? What about infanticide? What about Nancy and her statements about abortion? The list is long on both sides, though you ignore them on the left side.
    What about the abortion issue? I don't personally believe in it. My daughter's have never had one. My wife never had one. But I don't believe my belief system should be legislatively crammed down the rest of the country's throat. But you know that about me...this has been all covered before.

    BTW - Obama addressed this in his acceptance speech. There can be common ground as he said in his speech.
  16. #76  
    No one is ramming it down your throat. This is a state's right issue, not a federal issue. Where did you come up with the 72% thing? That is most interesting, but you must have missed the part about "recent weeks." Overall that is not a correct per centage. Reading further, look at the minutes of coverage! http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,6802141.story.

    We are not talking about your view or my view of the abortion issue. We are about though about the candidates. Obama is for abortion, for infanticide, then explains what he meant, then he is for it again for everyone but himself. He is in favor of it for his daughers (not quite 17 are they?)
  17. #77  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    No, Theog, it is not a waste of time. When a politician launches his campaign at the residence of a terrorist, there is a connection that binds the 2. You ignore it here, but you do not ignore it with Keating 5. You are exhibiting a double standard and name calling is a bad defense of it.

    Obama can strongly condemn what the terrorist did, and I have not a problem with that. However, to associate with that kind of person places questions of judgment right in the open - if it were not, then why or why do so many people have a problem with it and why oh why is it still discussed and why or why do people like you continue to defend him? If it were ok, then Obama would not have a problem in convincing people that it is ok, 'cause he is the one who will bring us all together - you said that.

    You protest too much, an indication that even you have a problem with the double standard.
    No one ignored anything... keating 5 does not equal obama holding a position on a board and having a guy there... a respected person of the community... are you saying once a criminal, always a criminal? Are you saying we should kill all criminals for every crime they ever commit? What is the use of jail in "your world?"

    Do we really want to go the route of "guilty by association?" How many people does mcsame know that fit?

    Veterans don't like mccain... that should tell you something.

    Guess I'll feed ben the troll... your posts are really ignorant. But I guess I'm wrong for that as well.
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  18. #78  
    Theog, those are your words, not mine. The problem is that the man stated publically after 9-11 that he probably had not done enough. That is the issue about judgment, nothing else.

    Also, enjoy the name calling, you have become very good at it.
  19. #79  
    Ben,

    Every time you post, someone refutes your allegations with facts, including your apparent obsession with Ayers.

    I don't think you should talk about lies until you respond to the post regarding McCain's lies. Will you go so far as to admit that the McCain campaign was lying on these issues? Rather than follow your usual pattern of saying "But look at what Obama did" in an effort to distract, I'd really like to see you answer these questions:

    - Palin's statements that she said "No, thanks" to the Bridge, when she clearly supported it.

    - The claim that Obama was referring to Palin with the "lipstick" line, when his quote clearly indicates that this isn't true.

    - McCain's statements that Obama wants to teach sex ed to kinders, when the bill clearly supported anti-predator education.

    - That McCain repeatedly states that Obama will raise taxes, when it's clear that between 80-90% of people will have tax cuts.

    - The fact that Karl Rove is even stating that McCain is stretching the truth.

    - The fact that Sarah Palin claimed that she went to Iraq, but never did.

    When a politician launches his campaign at the residence of a terrorist, there is a connection that binds the 2. You ignore it here, but you do not ignore it with Keating 5. You are exhibiting a double standard and name calling is a bad defense of it.
    Keating 5 and Ayers are very different. I would argue that the actions of a candidate (i.e. McCain's direct role in the Keating 5 scandal) should hold more weight than sitting on a committee with someone and having no involvement with that person's actions.
    Last edited by Bujin; 09/18/2008 at 07:23 AM.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  20. #80  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    Theog, those are your words, not mine.
    exactly... and that is the point, mccain does not stand behind his words. Obama does.

    You can't find anything on obama so you "create" stuff. If Obama picked a running mate that had a "troopergate" going on you would be swinging from the ceiling right now.

    We all know that McCain's judgment is clouded. You can't see that because you don't care... you have your own agenda on these boards. Others can't see it because they are in denial.
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
Page 4 of 20 FirstFirst 12345678914 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions