|
||
The Ugly Implications of McCain and Palin's Questions
Sarah Palin keeps asking people to ask more questions about Barack Obama. Now McCain has joined in on this refrain. But I don't get it. What more do they need to know? They keep saying he has to answer more questions about Bill Ayers, for example. But he has answered every ridiculous question on this topic a hundred times over. So, what are they really looking for?
It's not the McCain and Palin really think there is some deep and pertinent question that the media just has not gotten to yet about Obama's so-called relationship with Ayers. Otherwise, why don't they ask it themselves? Why doesn't John McCain take the next debate as an opportunity to ask Senator Obama about any profound question he has about Bill Ayers or any other disturbing connection Obama has?
The reason they don't do this is because there are no real questions there. This is a ploy to raise doubts in people's minds about Obama. They have nothing, but it's easy to say, "What else is Obama hiding?" The implication is that Barack Hussein Obama has more terrorist connections he is not telling us about. But since that is patently ridiculous and shameful, they can't say it out in the open. So, they hide behind the implications of questions like, "What else is he not telling us?"
What I want a reporter to ask Sarah Palin and John McCain is, "What is that you think Senator Obama is hiding? You keep asking the question, so you must think there is an answer. What is it? What is Senator Obama not telling us about Bill Ayers or anyone else?"
They don't have answer to that. Because they're real objective is to smear Obama as "the other." Palin has said several times in her rallies that Barack Obama is not like the Americans she knows. Someone should also ask her what she means by that. Then she brings up Ayers and "palling around with terrorists." It's not hard to see the picture she's drawing. Obama is not one of us. Look at his name; be careful, he is one of them.
They don't have the nerve to say it out aloud, so they hide behind their questions and implications. It is a despicable strategy and it has turned this into the ugliest presidential campaign I have seen in my lifetime.
Follow Cenk Uygur on Twitter: www.twitter.com/TheYoungTurks
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
CONT
}}}
As a side note, Ayers was a "60s radical", not a Muslim terrorist. Calling him "terrorist"
}}}
So, you are saying that all Muslims are terrorists??
Not very liberal of you..
I call Ayers a terrorist because that is exactly what he is. A terrorist. You can try to sugarcoat it all you want, but that doesn't change the facts.
Ayers is a terrorist. period..
}}}}
The Ayers thing has been thoroughly explored and nothing came of it.
{{{{
Ayers has NOT been explored to MY satisfaction. It's THAT simple. Senator Obama has NOT addressed the Ayers issue in any meaningful way. If he had, this thread would be REPLETE with his quotes, proving me wrong. The fact that there is not ONE SINGLE QUOTE from Senator Obama in this thread on the Ayers issue simply proves my assertion that Senator Obama has NOT addressed
Michale.....
@ChimesOfFreedom
}}}}
assert that Obama has ignored the issue, but in fact that is not what he has done
{{{{
He has mentioned it in passing, once or twice. To me that is NOT "addressing" the issue. To any logical, rational and non-partisan person, that is NOT "addressing" the issue..
You know it. I know it..
}}}
to claim that Bill Ayers is still a terrorist, no different from bin Laden, that he is unrepentant, etc etc, but the facts don't support that position.
}}}
Ayers IS unrepentant. FACT.. Ayers IS a terrorist. FACT
These facts are COMPLETELY supported. Your claims that they are not is simply disingenuous and out and out false....
}}}
So maybe you can point us all to one of these left wing "rags."
}}}
While "rags" is your term, not mine, HuffPo "news" fits your criteria of "lies and distortions wrapped inside opinion pieces masquerading as journalism." Taylor Marsh and Daily KOS also have "news" sections that fit your criteria as well. Those are simply three I know off the top of my head. I am sure if I dug, I could find more.
See, here is your problem. You want to claim that Democrats are better than Republicans. Yet, in EVERY instance you point a finger at Republicans, I can point a finger at Democrats. From scandals to personal and perverse attacks.. Everything you castigate the GOP for has also been done by Democrats.
Deny this. I DARE you...
Michale.....
CONT
Just as David Axelrod's statement that the Obama kids and the Ayers kids were in the same school is flat out wrong..
You see, it works both ways..
It is exactly because of all the misstatements floating around from BOTH sides that Senator Obama needs to sit down and address the issue, fully, completely and honestly.
Surely you can see the logic and rationale of such a course of action.
{{{{{{{{{{
Oh, you don't like my characterization of Newsmax and AmericanFreePress as rags? Too bad. That's what they are - very little different from Fox Nooz, that is, openly biased editorial content thinly disguised as journalism.
}}}}}}}}}}
I really don't care about your characterization. You have your opinions and are welcome to them.. I would merely point out that there are the same kinds of "rags" on the Left as well, as I am sure you would agree...
Michale.....
>> Senator Obama needs to sit down and address the issue, fully, completely and honestly
You can continue to insist that he needs to do what he's already done, based on something as flimsy as Axelrod's mistake way back in February, but you simply haven't made a very compelling case here for that. You can assert that Obama has ignored the issue, but in fact that is not what he has done.
You can also continue to claim that Bill Ayers is still a terrorist, no different from bin Laden, that he is unrepentant, etc etc, but the facts don't support that position.
As far as the "rags" on the left, I know of several opinion sites, but I know of none that offer lies and distortions wrapped inside opinion pieces masquerading as journalism. Nor do I know of any that suppress dissenting opinion in the manner practiced on certain right wing sites. So maybe you can point us all to one of these left wing "rags."
@ChimesOfFreedom
}}}}}}}
If I do that, will you promise not to run away and hide, as you've done with my last few postings? You know, the ones wherein I've refuted virtually everything you've had to say thus far?
{{{{{{{
You can bet that the LAST thing I can be accused of is "running away".. More often than not, I am sure that the Moderators would WISH I would!!! :D
{{{{{{{{{
Ayers could not have appointed Obama "president" of the CAC, as he was in no position to do so. Obama was appointed Chairman, not president, by Patricia Graham. Bill Ayers had nothing to do with it.
This is all in the NY Times article I posted here. Didn't you read it? Or do get all your "news" from rags like Newsmax?
{{{{{{{{
Probably.. But I read so much on a daily, if not hourly basis, that I cannot recall the specifics..
However, I have no reason to doubt your sincerity and thereby concede the point that THAT particular fact was in error..
CONT
"Bill Ayers lives in his neighborhood. Their kids attend the same school … They're certainly friendly, they know each other, as anyone whose kids go to school together."
-Obama Chief Strategist David Axelrod
(Ben Smith, "Ax On Ayers," The Politico's "Ben Smith" Blog, www.politico.com, 2/26/08)
It is THESE kinds of statements that really concern me.
This is an obvious lie because Ayers kids are in their 20s and 30s and Obama's children are not even teenagers yet..
So, how could they "attend the same school"?
All partisan bigotry aside, how can ANYONE come to the conclusion that Obama should ignore this issue??
Michale.....
So his campaign strategist tap danced poorly around a mudball.
You still haven't explained what Ayers means.
What does associating with someone who possibly committed crimes 40 years ago (when Obama was 8), make Obama guilty of? I'm waiting.
It's just like the article says, you have no point. Your purpose is to let our imaginations run wild with scenarios, but there is no point.
As a side note, Ayers was a "60s radical", not a Muslim terrorist. Calling him "terrorist" when there are more accurate ways of describing him was meant entirely to conjure images of Muslim extremism. Something completely unrelated to the 60s protest movement. As a mature adult, I think you know this. You are stubbornly unwilling to give it up though, because desperation is setting in.
The Ayers thing has been thoroughly explored and nothing came of it. It is an attempt to put the Democrats in "defense" mode so they can't talk about the issues. That is all there is to it. As long as they are debunking Ayers rumors, they aren't talking about the economy. It's a stupid trick, and it isn't working.
Time to move on to another mudball and hope desperately that it sticks this time.
Meanwhile Obama is picking up undecided voters daily. 21 days left. Tick tock, tick tock, tick tock.
This is a terrific article. It is crystal clear that McCain/Palin are praying on people's racism and fear to win this election. It truly is the sleaziest and most dishonest campaigns I've ever seen. Considering how little we really know about Palin, and how she has barely made herself available for interviews, I find it unbelievably hypocritical of her to accuse Obama of having something to hide. Perhaps she'd like to share with the world her "witch protection" ceremony that she went through?
I'm not so troubled about how little we know about Palin. Given the length of her political career, there isn't that much to know. What bothers me is that virtually every new piece of information that comes out on her is thoroughly unsavory. She doesn't appear to have anything to recommend her to anyone outside of the Neocon faithful.
I saw just a little while ago that she's claiming the Legislative Council report exonerates her, because it shows that all her efforts to get the trooper/ex-brother-in-law fired failed. As Keith Olbermann put it, "you ain't dead, so I couldna shot ya."
She does have one discernable talent: she lies with great sincerity.
I just googled the question, and came up with the links below. Is any of this true? If so, then the relationship is deeper than reported... much, much more than serving on a board together as Obama says... and I wonder why it's not in the mainstream press... unless it's all false, and Obama didn't do lectures with Ayers, nor announce his Senate candidacy at Ayer's house?
http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_ayers_acorn/2008/10/09/139114.html
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/obama_connection_148.html
Interesting articles.
Obviously slanted, but they facts they relay are compelling..
This simply adds to the urgency that Obama MUST address this issue.
Michale.....
Consider the source. Newsmax? AmericanFreePress?? You really had to dig for those links, eh? These "articles" are not journalism - you surely recognize that. They are hit pieces, filled with factual errors and outright lies, e.g. "Obama, just four years out of law school, was appointed CAC president by his buddy Ayers."
Neither of these outlets make much pretense, really, of being serious news sources.
I think you should report your findings to the FBI, if they are legitimate.
No? Why not? If you have proof, forward it to the FBI.
Oh wait, you can't because because blogs do not mean anything in a court of law.
LoL.
But I repeat, forward it to the FBI if you are truly concerned. Your feigned "worry" is noted and appreciated.
In the meantime, how is that Republican economy going lately?
LoL.
Who is the real John Sydney McCain? What is he not telling us about his relationship to George W. Bush?
Bush has done more to screw up/terrorize our country (and others) than Ayers ever could dream of.
Cenq, we know the answer to your question ""What is that you think Senator Obama is hiding? You keep asking the question, so you must think there is an answer. What is it? What is Senator Obama not telling us about Bill Ayers or anyone else?"
They know damn well Obama isn't hiding anything. Furthermore, they know that they are. (Latest is that Palin has been ordered to make her and her staff's 12 personal email accounts available - stay tuned).... They are using the usual distraction tactic.
Besides this isn't about Ayers at all and you bet they wish Ayers was another former radical and current university professor almost the same age, Angela Davis, but hell they have to make due with an old 1960's WHITE radical. They just want to remind people that Obama is - uh - BLACK and probably, maybe, what the hell, a Muslim Manchurian candidate.
And by the way, please HuffPo readers and mods. don't axe this post because I refer to my own column on another website (so small we're hardly your competitor) but I wrote about my impression that Gayle Quinnell, the woman who asked the Arab question and gave McCain the excuse to say Obama was a citizen actually said "he's not?" BEFORE McCain shakes his head "no". I think there's a good chance she was put up to asking this by McCain operatives. You can look at the video again read my case here: http://www.capitolhillblue.com/cont/node/11559
I was speaking to a McCain supporter last Friday who said he couldn't vote for Obama because he's a terrorist. So it is working, but I think it's only working with those who already have decided to vote GOP. Anyone else would feel like an idiot falling for such tripe.
It works on the ignorant, stupid, and racist out there...go to youtube and look up the Mccain/Palin supporters at a rally...All they're talking about is the same hate filled messages being delivered by the Mccain campaign...JOHN MCCAIN himself knows most of this stuff isn't true that's why he tries to play it down while the "pitbull in a skirt" riles up the dumba$$es to the point they're screaming "kill him!" at rallies.....How can this honestly be a good thing? Palin is a huge hypocrite and I find her supporters stupid as hell if they think she'll run for president in 2012 (do they honestly think the republicans are THAT stupid??)
As you said, it's not effective on the undecided. They are concerned with the economy, and nothing else right now.
The people who are already going to vote McCain, use this to cement their support of him in light of his endless string of campaign flip flops and platform shifts. It's also good for people who are racist and can't come to grips with it. It gives them something to say that eases their conscience.
and the push to get folks to see obama as osama is the reason why rev. wright is "off limits" -- if they bring up rev. wright, then they blow their 'osama is a muslim' bs.
you're right, it is the ugliest that i have ever seen.
The greatest thing about McCain/Palin's BS probing into "who exactly Barack Hussein Obama is"...is that if the tables were turned, it would be perfectly legit.
Who exactly is Senator McCain, why won't he release his medical records, why does his wife still have a relationship with Keating, why does he feel like it's ok to lead a campaign that blatantly lies to the faces of it's supporters?
Who is Sarah Palin whose husband was involved in the Alaskan Independence party where she gave a speech telling them "good job, guys", what really happened behind the Troopergate scandal that she seems to think there was no wrongdoing on her part, why does she feel the need to pray for gays and jews, what's up with her wacko church, and why did she feel the need to protect herself from witches. Why was it so hard for you to answer the simple question of what periodicals do you read?
Unlike Obama, these guys do not answer the questions.
Aren't both sides "legit'? They all "answer" as they see fit, which is to say not at all.
Careful... Yer introducing logical and OBJECTIVE thinking into an area that is sorely devoid of either...
The results are all too predictable...
Michale.....
I would ask Obama how he intends to use our money for all of his projects?
How he will reduce the federal debt and deficits?
How will his first budget look different than Bush's last one?
How will he stand up to pork gobbling congress, mil/ind complex, lobbyists, etc.
Forget all of the lack of judgement guilt by association junk, answer me those four questions.
Try going to Obama's website and reading all of his position papers. They are spelled out in black and white.
Why, too risky to lay it all out in a speech, town-hall, or debate, of course it is, thats what a real leasder would do, neither of these two clowns qualify.
He will answer those questions by surrounding himself with the best and the brightest who know what a team is, in stark contrast to the bumbling Mr Puddles express that is running on 5 cylinders
,misfiring and whos GPS is broken.
I hope so, I have been disapointed by every President since Nixon, we put too much stock in them and then enjoy the schadenfreude of their eventual flame-out, while congress skips merrily along not a care in the world!
Wow, Michale32086, not only is your world view myopic and uncharitable, but you're also challenged when it comes to recognizing sarcasm, and you're given to questioning the patriotism of people who disagree with you. What sort of training did you say you have? Anything to do with trolling message boards for the GOP?
I suppose you'll go on believing that Bill Ayers hosts the Hyde Park Sleeper Cell & Bridge Club pipe bomb party every week, and that Barack Obama is a regular attendee, and there isn't a damned thing anyone here can do about it. One more lost cause...
To those dialoging with Michale32086 you will save yourself some time and aggravation to know where Michale32086 starts from,
"once a terrorist always a terrorist" is what I believe he stated. I believe that means he is not a Christian and doesn't believe in our legal system, well parts of them, perhaps the ones he doesn't like. Also terrorism can be charged to many, some justly, Michale32086 wants to use only his terms. So in the frame of Michale32086 I demand to know the full relationship of all political leaders to Martin Luther King the consort to Malcom X and other terrorist leaders, the man that Hoover called a grave threat to our nation.
What I would like to see is a response from the Obama camp highlighting some of the prominent Republicans who have been on the same committees with Ayers, and challenge Mccain and Palin to ask the same questions of these individuals.
I think it is a mistake to try and respond with details of meetings etc. - these are facts which are easily ignored by a crowd whipped up. It's harder to ignore the implications of your smears when the targets could just as easily be white Republicans.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
